4.5 Article

Spider predation on a mirid pest in Japanese rice fields

期刊

BASIC AND APPLIED ECOLOGY
卷 12, 期 6, 页码 532-539

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.baae.2011.07.007

关键词

Biological control; Generalist predator; Gut-content analysis; Integrated pest management; Predator-prey interactions; Rice

类别

资金

  1. [20880011]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23780049, 10J03899] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spiders are common generalist predators, and understanding their potential in biological control is important for the development of integrated pest management programs. In this study, predation by three groups of spiders on the mind bug Stenotus rubrovittatus (Hemiptera: Miridae) in rice paddies was investigated using DNA-based gut-content analysis. A laboratory feeding study revealed that the detection half-lives of bug DNA in the spider gut at 25 degrees C was 3.4 days for Lycosidae and 1.5 days for Tetragnathidae. Individual spider predation on the mind bug was investigated by detecting DNA of prey in field-collected spiders. In total, 1199 spiders were assayed from three spider groups: Pirata subpiraticus (Lycosidae), Tetragnatha spp. (Tetra-gnathidae), and Pachygnatha clercki (Tetra-gnathidae), which each differ in their preferred microhabitat as well as their predatory habits. Detection rates of prey DNA in spiders increased significantly with the density of prey across all spider groups. P subpiraticus and Tetragnatha spp. predation showed a better fit to a saturated response curve to increasing prey density, while P. clercki showed a simple linear relationship with prey density. Densities of alternative prey species did not affect the detection rates of minds. These results suggest that predation on pests by generalist predators in an agroecosystem is affected not only by prey abundance but also by predator preference for specific prey. Predator preference is therefore an important factor to consider when estimating the role of natural enemies as biological control agents.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据