Fitness costs and benefits of antipredator behavior mediated by chemotactile cues in the wolf spider Pardosa milvina (Araneae: Lycosidae)

By M. Persons, S. E. Walker, A. Rypstra. 2002

127 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Genetics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a814cb7678fa06af935eb3dc0751fcc9d721d2ad

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. E. Hebets
2. R. Denno
3. G. Uetz
4. D. Finke
5. Claudio Gratton
6. D. Elias
7. Shira D. Gordon
8. Johan Lind

In Genetics

1. E. Hebets
2. G. Uetz
3. Shira D. Gordon
4. D. Elias
5. Johan Lind
6. Grant E. Brown
7. D. Finke
8. R. Denno

Citations in the corpus

• Female preference for complex/novel signals in a spider (2006, background): “Such freezing responses can be common in spiders in the presence of predator-related cues or by an ‘‘overloading’’ of a female’s sensory system (Barnes et al. 2002; Persons et al. 2002; Lehmann et al. 2004; Hebets and Papaj 2005).”
• Determining the fitness consequences of antipredation behavior (2005, background): “…levels in response to increased predation risk incurs fitness benefits has been documented in various taxa (e.g., Schwarzkopf and Shine, 1992; Sih, 1986; Skelly, 1994; e.g., Anholt and Werner, 1995, 1998; Biro et al., 2003a,b, 2004; Downes, 2002; Persons et al., 2001, 2002; Wisenden et al., 1999).”
• Antipredator responses of wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae) to sensory cues representing an avian predator (2009, background): “Additionally, a few studies have examined antipredator behaviour in terrestrial invertebrates, including insects and spiders (Riechert & Hedrick 1990; Kotiaho et al. 1998; Dicke & Grostal 2001; Persons & Rypstra 2001; Persons et al. 2001, 2002; Hieber et al. 2002; Taylor et al. 2005).”
• Effects of group size on the threat-sensitive response to varying concentrations of chemical alarm cues by juvenile convict cichlids (2006, background): “1997), terrestrial invertebrates (e.g., Persons and Rypstra 2001; Jackson et al. 2002; Persons et al. 2002), amphibians”
• Interactions between a hunting spider and a web‐builder: consequences of intraguild predation and cannibalism for prey suppression (2004, background): “…of Grammonota such as aggression and avoidance might diminish its risk of Pardosa attack, characteristics that are known to minimise intraguild predation and promote weak interactions among spider species (Uetz & Stratton, 1982; Marshall & Rypstra, 1999; Persons et al., 2002; Balfour et al., 2003).”
• The Value of Animal Behavior in Evaluations of Restoration Success (2008, background): “In addition, an individual’s fitness, that is, the genes it contributes to the next generation (Alcock 2001), is often closely linked to rates and/or outcomes of behaviors (e.g., Good et al. 2000; Persons et al. 2002; Vos & Hemerik 2003; Watson et al. 2007).”
• Evolutionary Biology of Animal Cognition (2004, background): “The term “gene by environment interaction” is restricted to cases where the environment has different effects on different genotypes (reviewed in Futuyma 1998, Pigliucci 2001).”
• The ecology of human fear: survival optimization and the nervous system (2015, background): “According to the “risk allocation hypothesis,” risk of predatory attack changes over time and this has a direct effect upon intensity of vigilance and time spent foraging (Lima, 1990).”