4.3 Article

The time scale of isotope signals in spiders: molting the remains of a previous diet

期刊

ENTOMOLOGIA EXPERIMENTALIS ET APPLICATA
卷 156, 期 3, 页码 271-278

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/eea.12328

关键词

stable isotope analysis; diet switches; tissue turnover; Lasiodora parahybana; Araneae; Theraphosidae

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stable isotope analysis (SIA) has emerged as an important tool for understanding consumer diets and diet shifts. However, although the general idea behind SIA is clear, the interpretation of data is often fraught with problems because tissue turnover and fractionations are not known. We investigated shifts in stable isotope composition of spiders following a diet shift, using mealworms fed either maize (C4) or wheat (C3) flour. Mealworms had different carbon isotope composition depending on their diet and this difference was reflected in spider body parts. In the experiment, we first fed the spiders on a diet of either maize-fed or wheat-fed mealworms and then switched diet at the time of the second molt. Spiders were then sampled repeatedly until the next molt. We sampled both legs and abdomens, as these are presumed to have different turnover of tissue, and also molt remains were sampled when this was relevant. The data indicated that the spider legs had a turnover of about 20days, whereas the spider abdomens had a turnover of about 8days. Molt remains had the slowest turnover and reflected the diet at the previous molt, when the exoskeleton was formed. Both these observations indicate that SIA may be successfully used for elucidating diet shifts. More problematic was the fact that fractionation of carbon isotope ratios varied with body parts and diets. When spiders were fed maize-mealworms then the fractionation was larger for abdomens, but when the spiders were fed wheat-mealworms then the fractionation was larger for legs. The mechanisms underlying this pattern are unclear and deserve further attention.

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

4.3
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