Stinging spines protect slug caterpillars (Limacodidae) from multiple generalist predators

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 153-160

  Murphy, Shannon M ^a   Leahy, Susannah M ^a   Williams, Laila S ^a   Lill, John T ^a  

^a GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Antipredator; Behavior; Larval defense, Lepidoptera; Limacodidae; Polistes; Predation; Prey choice; Reduviidae

Indexed keywords

ANTIPREDATOR DEFENSE; BIOASSAY; CATERPILLAR; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; GENERALIST; HERBIVORE; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; LARVA; LEARNING; MORPHOLOGY; PREY PREFERENCE; SLUG; SURVIVAL; WASP;

ACHARIA; HEXAPODA; INVERTEBRATA; LEPIDOPTERA; LIMACODIDAE; POLISTES; POLISTINAE; REDUVIIDAE; SIBINE;

EID: 72649100868     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arp166     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Aiello A, Solis MA. 2003. Defense mechanisms in Pyralidae and Choreutidae: fecal stalactities and escape holes, with remarks about cocoons, camouflage and aposematism. J Lepidopt Soc. 57:168-175.
2. Awan MS. 1985. Anti-predator ploys of Heliothis punctiger (Lepidop-tera: Noctuidae) caterpillars against the predator Oechalia schellen-bergii (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). Austr J Zool. 33:885-890.
3. Berenbaum MR, Miliczky E. 1984. Mantids and milkweed bugs: efficacy of aposematic coloration against invertebrate predators. Am Midland Nat. 111:64-68.
4. Bernays E, Graham M. 1988. On the evolution of host specificity in phytophagous arthropods. Ecology. 69:886-892.
5. Bernays EA, Cornelius ML. 1989. Generalist caterpillar prey are more palatable than specialists for the generalist predator Iridomyrmex humilis. Oecologia. 79:427-430.
6. Bohrer CB, Junior JR, Fernandes D, Sordi R, Guimaraes JA, Assreuy J, Termignoni C. 2007. Kallikrein-kinin system activation by Lonomia obliqua caterpillar bristles: involvement in edema and hypotension responses to envenomation. Toxicon. 49:663-669.
7. Bowers MD. 1990. Recycling plant natural products for insect defense. In: Evans DL, Schmidt JO, editors. Insect defenses: adaptive mechanisms and strategies of prey ad predators. Albany (NY): State University of New York Press. p. 353-386.
8. Castellanos I, Barbosa P. 2006. Evaluation of predation risk by a caterpillar using substrate-borne vibrations. Anim Behav. 72:461-469.
9. Conover WJ. 1999. Practical nonparametric statistics. 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
10. Coppinger RP. 1970. The effect of experience and novelty on avian feeding behavior with reference to the evolution of warning coloration in butterflies II. Reactions of naive birds to novel insects. Am Nat. 104:323-335.
11. Covell CV. 1984. Eastern moths. Boston (MA): Houghton Mifflin.
12. Damman H. 1986. The osmaterial glands of the swallowtail butterfly Eurytides marcellus as a defence against natural enemies. Ecol Ento-mol. 11:261-265.
13. Deml R, Dettner K. 2003. Comparative morphology and secretion chemistry of the scoli in caterpillars of Hyalophora cecropia. Natur-wissenschaften. 90:460-463.
14. DeVries PJ. 1991. Foam barriers, a new defense against ants for milkweed butterfly caterpillars (Nymphalidae: Danainae). J Res Lepi-doptera. 30:261-266.
15. Dyar HG. 1899. The life-histories of the New York slug caterpillars (Conclusion). J NY Entomol Soc. 7:234-253.
16. Dyer LA. 1995. Tasty generalists and nasty specialists? Antipredator mechanisms in tropical lepidopteran larvae. Ecology. 76: 1483-1496.
17. Dyer LA. 1997. Effectiveness of caterpillar defenses against three species of invertebrate predators. J Res Lepidopt. 34:48-68.
18. Dyer LA, Bowers MD. 1996. The importance of sequestered iridoid glycosides as a defense against an ant predator. J Chem Ecol. 22: 1527-1539.
19. Dyer LA, Floyd T. 1993. Determinants of predation on phytophagous insects: the importance of diet breadth. Oecologia. 96: 575-582.
20. Epstein ME. 1988. An overview of slug caterpillar moths (Lepidoptera: Limacodidae) with emphasis on genera in the New World Parasa group. [PhD Dissertation][St. Paul, MN]: University of Minnesota.
21. Epstein ME. 1995. Locomotion and its evolution in caterpillars with a slug-like ventrum (the Limacodid Group: Zygaenoidea). J Res Lepidoptera. 34:14-20.
22. Epstein ME, Smedley S, Eisner T. 1994. Sticky integumental coating of a dalcerid caterpillar: a deterrent to ants. J Lepidopt Soc. 48: 381-386.
23. Foot NC. 1922. Pathology of the dermatitis cause by Megalopyge oper-cularis, a texan caterpillar. J Exp Med. 35:737-753.
24. Gibbons W, Haynes R, Thomas JL. 1990. Poisonous plant and venomous animals of Alabama and adjoining states. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
25. Grant JB. 2006. Diversification of gut morphology in caterpillars is associated with defensive behavior. J Exp Biol. 209:3018-3024.
26. Grant JB. 2007. Ontogenetic colour change and the evolution of apo-sematism: a case study in panic moth caterpillars. J Anim Ecol. 76:439-447.
27. Greene E. 1989. A diet-induced developmental polymorphism in a caterpillar. Science. 243:643-646.
28. Halpin CG, Skelhorn J, Rowe C. 2008. Näive predators and selection for rare conspicuous defended prey: the initial evolution of apose-matism revisited. Anim Behav. 75:771-781.
29. Hunter AF. 2000. Gregariousness and repellent defences in the survival of phytophagous insects. Oikos. 91:213-224.
30. Inbar M, Lev-Yadun S. 2005. Conspicuous and aposematic spines in the animal kingdom. Natuwissenschaften. 92:170-172.
31. Lederhouse RC. 1990. Avoiding the hunt: primary defenses of Lepi-dopteran caterpillars. In: Evans DL, Schmidt JO, editors. Insect defenses: adaptive mechanisms and strategies of prey and predators. Albany (NY): State University of New York Press. p. 175-190.
32. Lill JT. 2008. Caterpillar-host plant relationships recorded from Plum-mers Island, Maryland (Insecta: Lepidoptera). Bull Biol Soc Washington. 15:75-79.
33. Lill JT, Marquis RJ. 2007. Microhabitat manipulation: ecosystem engineering by shelter-building insects. In: Cuddington K, Byers JE, Wilson WG, Hasting A, editors. Ecosystem engineers: plants to pro-tists. Burlington (MA): Academic Press.
34. Lill JT, Marquis RJ, Forkner RE, Le Corff J, Holmberg N, Barber NA. 2006. Leaf pubescence affects distribution and abundance of generalist slug caterpillars (Lepidoptera: Limacodidae). Environ Entomol. 35:797-806.
35. Lindstedt C, Lindstrom L, Mappes J. 2008. Hairiness and warning colours as components of antipredator defence: additive or interactive benefits? Anim Behav. 75:1703-1713.
36. Machado G, Freitas AVL. 2001. Larval defense against ant predation in the butterfly Smyrna blomfildia. Ecol Entomol. 26:436-439.
37. Mikolajewski DJ, Rolff J. 2004. Benefits of morphological defence demonstrated by direct manipulation in larval dragonflies. Evol Ecol Res. 6:619-626.
38. Montllor CB, Bernays EA. 1993. Invertebrate predators and caterpillar foraging. In: Stamp NE, Case TJ, editors. Caterpillars: ecological and evolutionary constraints on foraging. New York (NY): Chapman & Hall, Inc. p. 170-202.
39. Raveret Richter M. 2000. Social wasp (Hymenoptera: Vespidae) foraging behavior. Annu Rev Entomol. 45:121-150.
40. Rayor LS, Mooney LJ, Renwick JAA. 2007. Predatory behavior of Po-listes dominulus wasps in response to cardenolides and glucosinolates in Pieris napi caterpillars. J Chem Ecol. 33:1177-1185.
41. Reader T, Hochuli DF. 2003. Understanding gregariousness in a larval Lepidopteran: the roles of host plant, predation, and microclimate. Ecol Entomol. 28:729-737.
42. Schoonhoven LM, Jermy T, Van Loon JJA. 1998. Insect-plant biology: from physiology to evolution. London: Chapman & Hall.
43. Siegel S, Castellan NJJ. 1988. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. Columbus (OH): McGraw Hill.
44. Speed MP, Ruxton GD. 2005. Warning displays in spiny animals: one (more) evolutionary route to aposematism. Evolution. 59:2499-2508.
45. Stamp NE, Casey TM. 1993. Caterpillars: ecological and evolutionary constraints on foraging. New York (NY): Chapman & Hall, Inc.
46. Stamp NE, Wilkens RT. 1993. On the cryptic side of life: being un-apparent to enemies and the consequences for foraging and growth of caterpillars. In: Stamp NE, Casey TM, editors. Caterpillars: ecological and evolutionary constraints on foraging. New York: Chapman & Hall, Inc. p. 283-330.
47. Strong DR, Lawton JH, Southwood R. 1984. Insects on plants. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
48. Tollrian R, Harvell CD. 1999. The ecology and evolution of inducible defenses. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
49. Wagner DL. 2005. Caterpillars of Eastern North America. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
50. Weiss MR. 2003. Good housekeeping: why do shelter-dwelling caterpillars fling their frass? Ecol Lett. 6:361-370.
51. Weiss MR, Wilson EE, Castellanos I. 2004. Predatory wasps learn to overcome the shelter defences of their larval prey. Anim Behav. 68:45-54.
52. Whelan CJ, Holmes RT, Smith HR. 1989. Bird predation on gypsy-moth (Lepidoptera, Lymantriidae) larvae-an aviary study. Environ Entomol. 18:43-45.