Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-02T21:09:24.062Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

PREDATOR AVOIDANCE POSTURING OF GRASSHOPPERS (ORTHOPTERA: ACRIDIDAE) FROM THE COLORADO ALPINE AND PLAINS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Peter G. Kevan ,
John G. H. Cant  and
D. Keith McE. Kevan
Peter G. Kevan
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario NlG 2W1, Canada
John G. H. Cant
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27706, U.S.A.
D. Keith McE. Kevan
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology and Lyman Entomological Museum and Research Laboratory, Macdonald Campus of McGill University, Ste. Anne de Bellevue, Quebec H9X 1C0, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Prey avoid predators in a wide variety of ways. Grasshoppers of the alpine habitat exhibit predator-avoidance posturing. Furthermore, they show sexual diethism (behavioural differences between sexes) in which the males of Aeropedellus clavatus (Thomas) and Melanoplus marshalli marshalli (Thomas) prance (hop without progression), tending to face the oncoming threat, more so than the females. The latter do not prance to the same extent and more frequently face away from the threat. On the plains, Melanoplus bivitattus (Say) and M. sanguinipes sanguinipes (Fabricius) tend to assume a sideways stance relative to the oncoming threat. Neither plains species exhibits sexual diethism in avoidance behaviour. Prancing occurs in the plains species but, in males, is less frequent than in alpine species. These different predator-avoidance behaviours are apparently related to the need for the grasshoppers to maintain surveillance of potential predators in habitats of different temperature regimes and density and height of cover.

Résumé

Une proie évite un prédateur par de moyens variés. Les acridiens d'habitat alpin démontrent des postures particulières devant un prédateur afin de s'évader. En plus, elles manifestent un diéthisme sexuel (comportement différent d'un sexe à l'autre); le mâle du Aeropedellus clavatus (Thomas) et du Melanoplus marshalli marshalli (Thomas) "caracole" (sautille sans avancer), avec la tendance de faire face à la menace imminente, plus que la femelle. Celle-ci ne caracole pas au même degré et, plus fréquemment, elle se détourne de la menace. Sur les prairies, Melanoplus bivitattus (Say) et M. sanguinipes (Fabricius) ont tendance d'assumer une position de côté, relative au prédateur imminent. Aucune des deux espèces de prairies démontre le diéthisme sexuel dans leur comportement face au prédateur. "Caracoler" se voit dans les espèces de prairies mais, chez le mâle, cette danse est moins fréquente que chez les espèces alpines. Ces différents comportements pour éviter un prédateur sont apparemment reliés au besoin des acridiens de maintenir une surveillance sur les prédateurs potentiels dans des habitats à différents régimes de température et à couverts de hauteur et de densité différents.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 115 , Issue 2 , February 1983 , pp. 115 - 122
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1983

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

Alexander, G. 1951. The occurrence of Orthoptera at high altitudes, with special reference to Colorado Acrididae. Ecology 31: 104–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, G. and Hilliard, J. R.. 1964. Life history of Aeropedellus clavatus (Orthoptera: Acrididae) in the alpine tundra of Colorado. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 57: 310–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, N. L. and Wright, J. S.. 1952. Grasshopper investigations on Montana range land. Tech. Bull. Montana agric. Exp. Stn 486. 46 pp.Google Scholar
Beier, M. 1955. Ordnung Saltatoptera M. (Saltatoria Latreille 1817). Bronns Kl. Ord. Tierr. 5: (3) [6 (5)]: 34–304 (p. 100).Google Scholar
Beier, M. 1964. Blattopteroidea: Mantodea. Bronns Kl. Ord. Tierr. 5 (3) [6 (5)]: 849–970.Google Scholar
Chopard, L. 1938. La biologie des Orthoptères. Encycl. Ent. (A) 20: iv + 541 pp., 1 + 4 pl.Google Scholar
Chopard, L. 1949. Le mimétisme: les colorations animales — dissimulation des formes et déguisements — ressemblances mimétiques. Payot, Paris.Google Scholar
Edmunds, M. 1974. Defence in animals: a survey of anti-predator defences. Longman, Harlow, London.Google Scholar
Gillis, J. E. 1980. Substrate color-matching cues in two sympatric morphs of a cryptic grasshopper. Abstr. Second int. Congr. syst. evolut. Biol. (Vancouver, July 1980): 210.Google Scholar
Gillis, J. E. 1982. Substrate colour-matching cues in the cryptic grasshopper Circotettix rabula rabula (Rehn & Hebard). Anim. Behav. 30: 113–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mani, M. S. 1968. Ecology and biogeography of high altitude insects. W. Junk, The Hague.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothschild, M. 1973. Secondary plant substances and warning colouration in insects. Symp. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 6: 59–83.Google Scholar
Schultz, J. 1981. Adaptive changes in antipredator behavior of a grasshopper during development. Evolution 35: 175–179.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Uvarov, B. P. 1977. Grasshoppers and locusts: a handbook of general acridology. Volume 2. Centre for Overseas Pest Research, London.Google Scholar
White, E. G. 1978. Energetics and consumption rates of alpine grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae) in New Zealand. Oecologia 33: 17–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitman, D. W. 1982. Grasshopper sexual pheromone: a component of the defensive secretion of Taeniopoda eques. Physiol. Ent. 7: 111–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wickler, W. 1968. Mimicry in plants and animals. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London.Google Scholar
Zar, J. H. 1974. Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.Google Scholar