Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- spiders (2)
- - (1)
- <i>Argiope bruennichi</i> (1)
- Arachnida (1)
- Araneae (1)
- Bodian staining (1)
- Tenericutes (1)
- electron microscopy (1)
- endosymbiont (1)
- gustation (1)
Institute
Comparative neuroanatomy of the central nervous system in web-building and cursorial hunting spiders
(2023)
Spiders (Araneae) include cursorial species that stalk their prey and more stationary species that use webs for prey capture. While many cursorial hunting spiders rely on visual cues, web-building spiders use vibratory cues (mechanosensation) for prey capture. We predicted that the differences in primary sensory input between the species are mirrored by differences in the morphology/architecture of the central nervous system (CNS). Here, we investigated the CNS anatomy of four spider species, two cursorial hunters Pardosa amentata (Lycosidae) and Marpissa muscosa (Salticidae), and two web-building hunters Argiope bruennichi (Araneidae) and Parasteatoda tepidariorum (Theridiidae). Their CNS was analyzed using Bodian silver impregnations, immunohistochemistry, and microCT analysis. We found that there are major differences between species in the secondary eye pathway of the brain that pertain to first-order, second-order, and higher order brain centers (mushroom bodies [MB]). While P. amentata and M. muscosa have prominent visual neuropils and MB, these are much reduced in the two web-building species. Argiope bruennichi lacks second-order visual neuropils but has specialized photoreceptors that project into two distinct visual neuropils, and P. tepidariorum lacks MB, suggesting that motion vision might be absent in this species. Interestingly, the differences in the ventral nerve cord are much less pronounced, but the web-building spiders have proportionally larger leg neuropils than the cursorial spiders. Our findings suggest that the importance of visual information is much reduced in web-building spiders, compared to cursorial spiders, while processing of mechanosensory information requires the same major circuits in both web-building and cursorial hunting spiders.
Abstract
While chemical communication has been investigated intensively in vertebrates and insects, relatively little is known about the sensory world of spiders despite the fact that chemical cues play a key role in natural and sexual selection in this group. In insects, olfaction is performed with wall–pore and gustation with tip‐pore sensilla. Since spiders possess tip‐pore sensilla only, it is unclear how they accomplish olfaction. We scrutinized the ultrastructure of the trichoid tip‐pore sensilla of the orb weaving spider Argiope bruennichi—a common Palearctic species the males of which are known to be attracted by female sex pheromone. We also investigated the congener Argiope blanda. We examined whether the tip‐pore sensilla differ in ultrastructure depending on sex and their position on the tarsi of walking legs of which only the distal parts are in contact with the substrate. We hypothesized as yet undetected differences in ultrastructure that suggest gustatory versus olfactory functions. All tarsal tip‐pore sensilla of both species exhibit characters typical of contact‐chemoreceptors, such as (a) the presence of a pore at the tip of the sensillum shaft, (b) 2–22 uniciliated chemoreceptive cells with elongated and unbranched dendrites reaching up to the tip‐pore, (c) two integrated mechanoreceptive cells with short dendrites and large tubular bodies attached to the sensillum shaft's base, and (d) a socket structure with suspension fibres that render the sensillum shaft flexible. The newly found third mechanoreceptive cell attached to the proximal end of the peridendritic shaft cylinder by a small tubular body was likely overlooked in previous studies. The organization of tarsal tip‐pore sensilla did not differ depending on the position on the tarsus nor between the sexes. As no wall‐pore sensilla were detected, we discuss the probability that a single type of sensillum performs both gustation and olfaction in spiders.