Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T02:51:58.616Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Detection of scavenged material in the guts of predators using monoclonal antibodies: a significant source of error in measurement of predation?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

C.R. Calder ,
J.D. Harwood  and
W.O.C. Symondson
C.R. Calder
Affiliation:
School of Biosciences, Cardiff University, PO Box 915, Cardiff, CF10 3TL, UK
J.D. Harwood*
Affiliation:
School of Biosciences, Cardiff University, PO Box 915, Cardiff, CF10 3TL, UK
W.O.C. Symondson
Affiliation:
School of Biosciences, Cardiff University, PO Box 915, Cardiff, CF10 3TL, UK
*
*Department of Entomology, University of Kentucky, S-225 Agricultural Science Center – North, Lexington, KY 40546-0091, USA Fax: 001 859 323 1120 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Molecular detection systems used to analyse the gut contents of invertebrate predators have enhanced our understanding of trophic interactions, but do not distinguish between the methods of consumption. Many predators regularly scavenge, which could have profound implications for quantitative analyses of the dynamics of predation. We report the first quantified assessment of the potential error caused by scavenging in post-mortem measurements of predation in a slug = carabid system. An anti-slug monoclonal antibody was able to detect antigens from decayed slugs after surprisingly long periods, significantly longer on relatively sterile peat than on natural soil. On soil the half-life of antibody-detectable slug proteins was 8.2 days while on peat it was 11.5 days. When slugs that had decayed on soil for 100 h were fed to the carabid predator Pterostichus melanarius, slug proteins could still be identified after 6 h (but not 12 h) digestion. Fresh and decayed slug was eaten in equal quantities by the beetles suggesting no aversion to the latter. The results suggest that significant errors may be caused by scavenging leading to inaccurate interpretation of predation rates in the field.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 95 , Issue 1 , February 2005 , pp. 57 - 62
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agustí, N., Shayler, S.P., Harwood, J.D., Vaughan, I.P., Sunderland, K.D. & Symondson, W.O.C. (2003) Collembola as alternative prey sustaining spiders in arable ecosystems: prey detection within predators using molecular methods. Molecular Ecology 12, 3467–3476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohan, D.A., Bohan, A.C., Glen, D.M., Symondson, W.O.C., Wiltshire, C.W. & Hughes, L. (2000) Spatial dynamics of predation by carabid beetles on slugs. Journal of Animal Ecology 69, 367–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Y., Giles, K.L., Payton, M.E. & Greenstone, M.H. (2000) Identifying key cereal aphid predators by molecular gut analysis. Molecular Ecology 9, 1887–1898.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuthbertson, A.G.S., Fleming, C.C. & Murchie, A.K. (2003) Detection of Rhopalosiphum insertum (apple–grass aphid) predation by the predatory mite Anystis baccarum using molecular gut analysis. Agricultural and Forest Entomology 5, 219–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodd, C.S. (2004) Development and optimization of PCR-based techniques in predator gut analysis. PhD thesis, Cardiff University.Google Scholar
Dodd, C.S., Bruford, M.W., Symondson, W.O.C. & Glen, D.M. (2003) Detection of slug DNA within carabid predators using prey-specific PCR primers. pp. 13&20 in Slug and snail pests: agricultural, veterinary and environmental perspectives. Brighton Crop Protection Council Alton, UK.Google Scholar
Farrell, L.E., Roman, J. & Sunquist, M.E. (2000) Dietary separation of sympatric carnivores identified by molecular analysis of scats. Molecular Ecology 9, 1583–1590.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenstone, M.H. & Shufran, K.A. (2003) Spider predation: species-specific identification of gut contents by polymerase chain reaction. Journal of Arachnology 31, 131–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harwood, J.D., Phillips, S.W., Sunderland, K.D. & Symondson, W.O.C. (2001a) Secondary predation: quantification of food chain errors in an aphid–spider–carabid system using monoclonal antibodies. Molecular Ecology 10, 2049–2057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harwood, J.D., Sunderland, K.D. & Symondson, W.O.C. (2001b) Living where the food is: web location by linyphiid spiders in relation to prey availability in winter wheat. Journal of Applied Ecology 38, 88–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harwood, J.D., Sunderland, K.D. & Symondson, W.O.C. (2003) Web-location by linyphiid spiders: prey-specific aggregation and foraging strategies. Journal of Animal Ecology 72, 745–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harwood, J.D., Sunderland, K.D. & Symondson, W.O.C. (2004) Prey selection by linyphiid spiders: molecular tracking of the effects of alternative prey on rates of aphid consumption in the field. Molecular Ecology 13, 3549–3560.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harwood, J.D., Sunderland, K.D. & Symondson, W.O.C. (2005) A quantitative assessment using monoclonal antibodies of the potential of the tetragnathid spider Pachygnatha degeeri (Araneae: Tetragnathidae) to control aphids. Bulletin of Entomological Research.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoogendoorn, M. & Heimpel, G.E. (2001) PCR-based gut content analysis of insect predators: using ribosomal ITS-1 fragments from prey to estimate predation frequency. Molecular Ecology 10, 2059–2068.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaspar, M.L., Reeson, A.F., Cooper, S.J.B., Perry, K.D. & Austin, A.D. (2004) Assessment of prey overlap between a native (Polistes humilis) and an introduced (Vespula germanica) social wasp using morphology and phylogenetic analyses of 16S rDNA. Molecular Ecology 13, 2037–2048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, A. & Gsödl, S. (2001) Prey vulnerability and active predator choice as determinants of prey selection: a carabid beetle and its aphid prey. Journal of Applied Entomology 125, 53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langan, A.M., Pilkington, G. & Wheater, C.P. (2001) Feeding preferences of a predatory beetle (Pterostichus madidus) for slugs exposed to lethal and sub-lethal dosages of metaldehyde. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 98, 245–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lövei, G.L. & Sunderland, K.D. (1996) Ecology and behaviour of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Annual Review of Entomology 41, 231–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mair, J. & Port, G.R. (2001) Predation by the carabid beetles Pterostichus madidus and Nebria brevicollis is affected by the size and condition of the prey slug Deroceras reticulatum. Agricultural and Forest Entomology 3, 99–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Persons, M.H. & Uetz, G.W. (1997) The effect of prey movement on attack behavior and patch residence decision rules or wolf spiders (Araneae, Lycosidae). Journal of Insect Behaviour 10, 737–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schenk, D. & Bacher, S. (2004) Detection of shield beetle remains in predators using a monoclonal antibody. Journal of Applied Entomology 128, 273–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheppard, S.K., Henneman, M.L., Memmott, J. & Symondson, W.O.C. (2004) Infiltration by alien predators into invertebrate food webs in Hawaii: a molecular approach. Molecular Ecology 13, 2077–2088.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sunderland, K.D. (1996) Progress in quantifying predation using antibody techniques. pp. 419–455 in Symondson, W.O.C., Liddell, J.E. (Eds) The ecology of agricultural pests: biochemical approaches. London, Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Sunderland, K.D. (2002) Invertebrate pest control by carabids. pp. 165–214 in Holland, J.M. (Ed). The agroecology of carabid beetles. Andover, Intercept.Google Scholar
Sutherland, R.M. (2000) Molecular analysis of avian diets. PhD thesis, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
Symondson, W.O.C. (1989) Biological control of slugs by carabids. pp. 295–300 in Henderson, I. (Ed). Slugs and snails in world agriculture. BCPC Monoograph 41, British Crop Protection Council, Guildford, UK.Google Scholar
Symondson, W.O.C. (2002a) Molecular identification of prey in predator diets. Molecular Ecology 11, 627–641.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Symondson, W.O.C. (2002b) Diagnostic techniques for determining carabid diets. pp. 137–164 in Holland, J.M. (Ed). The agroecology of carabid beetles. Andover, Intercept.Google Scholar
Symondson, W.O.C. & Liddell, J.E. (1996) A species-specific monoclonal antibody system for detecting the remains of field slugs, Deroceras reticulatum (Müller) (Mollusca: Pulmonata) in carabid beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Biocontrol Science and Technology 6, 91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Symondson, W.O.C., Glen, D.M., Wiltshire, C.W., Langdon, C.J. & Liddell, J.E. (1996) Effects of cultivation techniques and methods of straw disposal on predation by Pterostichus melanarius (Coleoptera: Carabidae) upon slugs (Gastropoda: Pulmonata) in an arable field. Journal of Applied Ecology 33, 741–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Symondson, W.O.C., Erickson, M.L., Liddell, J.E. & Jayawardena, K.G.I. (1999) Amplified detection, using a monoclonal antibody, of an aphid-specific epitope exposed during digestion in the gut of a predator. Insect Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 29, 873–882.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Symondson, W.O.C., Glen, D.M., Erickson, M.L., Liddell, J.E. & Langdon, C.J. (2000) Do earthworms help to sustain the slug predator Pterostichus melanarius (Coleoptera: Carabidae) within crops? Investigations using monoclonal antibodies. Molecular Ecology 9, 1279–1292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winder, L., Alexander, C.J., Holland, J.M., Symondson, W.O.C., Perry, J. & Woolley, C.Predatory activity and spatial pattern: the response of generalist carabids to their aphid prey. Journal of Animal Ecology (in press).Google Scholar
Zaidi, R.H., Jaal, Z., Hawkes, N.J., Hemingway, J. & Symondson, W.O.C. (1999) Can multiple-copy sequences of DNA be detected amongst the gut contents of invertebrate predators. Molecular Ecology 8, 2081–2088.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed