Find research datasets worth reusing

opennotspecifiedSep 2020View details →

Figure 1 in High cryptic diversity in the kleptoparasitic genus Hyalorisia Dall, 1889 (Littorinimorpha: Capulidae) with the description of nine new species from the Indo-West Pacific

Figure 1. Phylogenetic relationships of the genus Hyalorisia (Bayesian tree based on the COI dataset). Numbers at nodes indicate branch support values (PP and UFb values, respectively); only values ≥95% are shown. Boxes indicate the final species hypotheses (MOTUs) for the genus. The histogram displays the distribution of the pairwise genetic distances (K2P) for the MOTUs, as based on the COI alignment; the black bars on the left are intraspecific distances and the yellow bars on the right are interspecific distances. The last two letters in the sample codes indicate the relevant general area of origin: ANT, Antarctica; JP, Japan; AK, Alaska; WA, Washington State; CA, California; PH, Philippines; NC, New Caledonia; SE, Sweden; IT, Italy; FR, Corsica; CNSea, South China Sea; MZChannel, Mozambique Channel; MG, Madagascar; PG, Papua New Guinea; SB, Solomon Islands; GP, Guadeloupe. Scale bar indicates substitutions per site.

opennotspecifiedSep 2020View details →

Figure 3 in High cryptic diversity in the kleptoparasitic genus Hyalorisia Dall, 1889 (Littorinimorpha: Capulidae) with the description of nine new species from the Indo-West Pacific

Figure 3. Protoconchs of Hyalorisia. A. Hyalorisia galea, MNHN-IM-2013-61536. B. Hyalorisia neocaledonica n. sp., MNHN-IM-2013-65907. C. Hyalorisia tosaensis, MNHN-IM-2007-34794. D. Hyalorisia nupta n. sp., MNHN-IM-2007-34005. E. Hyalorisia lehibe n. sp., MNHN-IM-2007-39212. F. Hyalorisia nanhaiensis n. sp., MNHN-IM-2013-34796. G. Hyalorisia kely n. sp., MNHN-IM-2007-38809. H. Hyalorisia melanesica n. sp., MNHN-IM-2013-58359. I. Hyalorisia profunda n. sp., MNHN-IM-2007-33828. J. Hyalorisia madagascarensis n. sp., MNHN-IM-39292. K. Hyalorisia solomonensis n. sp., MNHN-IM-2007-34215. Scale bars = 100 µm.

opencc-zeroDec 2016View details →

Data from: Multicontinental community phylogenetics of avian mixed-species flocks reveal the role of the stability of associations and of kleptoparasitism

If understood as a way to forage socially without incurring intra-specific competition for mates or other resources, mixed-species foraging flocks are predicted to be composed of functionally similar species. In the most intensively studied mixed-species foraging system, understory forest birds, relevant functional traits are however extremely difficult to measure and best replaced by phylogenetic relatedness. A multicontinental analysis of flock phylogenetic structure revealed departures from the expected phylogenetic clustering. Long-lasting associations (> one day) were phylogenetically overdispersed, indicating that these associations are affected by competitive exclusion or by mutualistic interactions. However, where kleptoparasites occurred, this effect disappeared completely, as expected if the dilution of kleptoparasitism risk compensated competition between related species. Mixed-species flocks should not be analyzed as a homogeneous phenomenon.

opencc-zeroDec 2015View details →

Data from: Revealing kleptoparasitic and predatory tendencies in an African mammal community using camera traps: a comparison of spatiotemporal approaches

Camera trap data are increasingly being used to characterise relationships between the spatiotemporal activity patterns of sympatric mammal species, often with a view to inferring inter-specific interactions. In this context, we attempted to characterise the kleptoparasitic and predatory tendencies of spotted hyaenas Crocuta crocuta and lions Panthera leo from photographic data collected across 54 camera trap stations and two dry seasons in Tanzania's Ruaha National Park. We applied four different methods of quantifying spatiotemporal associations, including one strictly temporal approach (activity pattern overlap), one strictly spatial approach (co-occupancy modelling), and two spatiotemporal approaches (co-detection modelling and temporal spacing at shared camera trap sites). We expected a kleptoparasitic relationship between spotted hyaenas and lions to result in a positive spatiotemporal association, and further hypothesised that the association between lions and their favourite prey in Ruaha, the giraffe Giraffa camelopardalis and the zebra Equus quagga, would be stronger than those observed with non-preferred prey species (the impala Aepyceros melampus and the dikdik Madoqua kirkii). Only approaches incorporating both the temporal and spatial components of camera trap data resulted in significant associative patterns. The latter were particularly sensitive to the temporal resolution chosen to define species detections (i.e. occasion length), and only revealed a significant positive association between lion on spotted hyaena detections, as well as a tendency for both species to follow each other at camera trap sites, during the dry season of 2013, but not that of 2014. In both seasons, observed spatiotemporal associations between lions and each of the four herbivore species considered provided no convincing or consistent indications of any predatory preferences. Our study suggests that, when making inferences on inter-specific interactions from camera trap data, due regards should be given to the potential behavioural and methodological processes underlying observed spatiotemporal patterns.

opencc-zeroDec 2017View details →

Data from: Effects of host colony size and hygiene behaviors on social spider kleptoparasite loads along an elevation gradient

1.Group living animals are likely to attract more parasites than solitary ones. Parasite loads, however, should also depend on environmental conditions and on host characteristics and behaviors. Previous work has found that social spider colonies harbor communities of kleptoparasitic spiders thats forego building their own web and, instead, steal prey from their social host. 2.We examined parasite loads and host hygiene behaviors in colonies of social and subsocial spiders in the genus Anelosimus along an elevation gradient in eastern Ecuador. 3.We found that parasite loads declined dramatically with increasing elevation. Host hygiene behaviors, such as debris removal, web repair, and interactions with the parasites, also declined with elevation. Within elevations, species with more frequent hygiene behaviors appeared more successful at keeping parasites at bay. Contrary to our predictions, parasite density declined with host nest and colony size. 4.The decline in parasite loads at higher elevations likely reflects a lower rate of energy exchange between colonies and their environments, where colder temperatures mean fewer and smaller prey for colonies to process. The decline in parasite density with host colony size may reflect a decline in the number of accessible prey in larger host colonies, as larger colonies should capture fewer but larger insects due to scaling properties of their three dimensional webs. 5.Social immunity, whereby a social host uses social behaviour to fight against parasites, has been studied in eusocial and non‐eusocial insects. This study opens up social spiders as a novel system in which to study how host characteristics interact with environmental factors to affect parasite loads. It also introduces the concept of group‐level immunity to social spiders and suggests a role for colony‐level metabolism in determining ecological patterns in parasitism.

FIGURES 49, 50. 49 in Descriptions of four kleptoparasitic spiders of the genus Mysmenopsis (Araneae, Mysmenidae) and their potential host spider species in the genus Linothele (Araneae, Dipluridae) from Ecuador

FIGURES 49, 50. 49, Web of female Linothele yanachanka n. sp. 50, Web of juvenile Linothele quori n. sp.

FIGURES 44–47. Linothele quori n in Descriptions of four kleptoparasitic spiders of the genus Mysmenopsis (Araneae, Mysmenidae) and their potential host spider species in the genus Linothele (Araneae, Dipluridae) from Ecuador

FIGURES 44–47. Linothele quori n. sp. Male 44–46. Female 47. 44, Palp, retrolateral view. 45, Sternum, ventral view. 46, Leg I, prolateral view. 47, Abdomen, ventral view.

FIGURES 41–43. Linothele quori n in Descriptions of four kleptoparasitic spiders of the genus Mysmenopsis (Araneae, Mysmenidae) and their potential host spider species in the genus Linothele (Araneae, Dipluridae) from Ecuador

FIGURES 41–43. Linothele quori n. sp. Female. 41, Female, lateral view. 42, Female holotype internal genitalia, dorsal view. 43, Female paratype internal genitalia, dorsal view.

FIGURES 37–40. Linothele tsachilas n in Descriptions of four kleptoparasitic spiders of the genus Mysmenopsis (Araneae, Mysmenidae) and their potential host spider species in the genus Linothele (Araneae, Dipluridae) from Ecuador

FIGURES 37–40. Linothele tsachilas n. sp. Female. 37, Holotype, lateral view. 38, Sternum, ventral view. 38, Holotype internal genitalia, dorsal view. 40, Paratype internal genitalia, dorsal view.

FIGURES 30–33. Linothele pukachumpi n in Descriptions of four kleptoparasitic spiders of the genus Mysmenopsis (Araneae, Mysmenidae) and their potential host spider species in the genus Linothele (Araneae, Dipluridae) from Ecuador

FIGURES 30–33. Linothele pukachumpi n. sp. Female. 30, Holotype, lateral view. 31, Sternum, ventral view. 32, Holotype internal genitalia, dorsal view. 33, Paratype internal genitalia, dorsal view.

FIGURES 2–7. Mysmenopsis onorei n in Descriptions of four kleptoparasitic spiders of the genus Mysmenopsis (Araneae, Mysmenidae) and their potential host spider species in the genus Linothele (Araneae, Dipluridae) from Ecuador

FIGURES 2–7. Mysmenopsis onorei n. sp. Male 2–4. Female 5–7. 2, Leg I, prolateral view. 3, Palp, retrolateral view. 4, Palp, prolateral view. 5, Leg I, prolateral view. 6, Epigynum, ventral view. 7, Internal genitalia, dorsal view.

FIGURES 34–36. Linothele zaia n in Descriptions of four kleptoparasitic spiders of the genus Mysmenopsis (Araneae, Mysmenidae) and their potential host spider species in the genus Linothele (Araneae, Dipluridae) from Ecuador

FIGURES 34–36. Linothele zaia n. sp. Female. 34, Holotype, lateral view. 35, Sternum, ventral view. 36, Holotype internal genitalia, dorsal view.

FIGURES 8–12. Mysmenopsis otonga n in Descriptions of four kleptoparasitic spiders of the genus Mysmenopsis (Araneae, Mysmenidae) and their potential host spider species in the genus Linothele (Araneae, Dipluridae) from Ecuador

FIGURES 8–12. Mysmenopsis otonga n. sp. Male 8–10. Female 11–12. 8, Abdomen, dorsal view. 9, Palp, retrolateral view. 10, Palp, prolateral view. 11, Epigynum, ventral view. 12, Internal genitalia, dorsal view.

FIGURES 13–17. Mysmenopsis fernandoi n in Descriptions of four kleptoparasitic spiders of the genus Mysmenopsis (Araneae, Mysmenidae) and their potential host spider species in the genus Linothele (Araneae, Dipluridae) from Ecuador

FIGURES 13–17. Mysmenopsis fernandoi n. sp. Male 13–15. Female 16–17. 13, Abdomen, dorsal view. 14, Palp, retrolateral view. 15, Palp, prolateral view. 16, Epigynum, ventral view. 17, Internal genitalia, dorsal view.

FIGURES 18–22. Mysmenopsis chiquita n in Descriptions of four kleptoparasitic spiders of the genus Mysmenopsis (Araneae, Mysmenidae) and their potential host spider species in the genus Linothele (Araneae, Dipluridae) from Ecuador

FIGURES 18–22. Mysmenopsis chiquita n. sp. Male 18–20. Female 21–22.18, Abdomen, dorsal view. 19, Palp, retrolateral view. 20, Palp, prolateral view. 21, Epigynum, ventral view. 22, Internal genitalia, dorsal view.

FIGURES 25–29. Linothele yanachanka n in Descriptions of four kleptoparasitic spiders of the genus Mysmenopsis (Araneae, Mysmenidae) and their potential host spider species in the genus Linothele (Araneae, Dipluridae) from Ecuador

FIGURES 25–29. Linothele yanachanka n. sp. Female 25–27. Male 28, 29. 25, Sternum, ventral view. 26, Holotype internal genitalia, dorsal view. 27, Paratype internal genitalia, dorsal view. 28, Palp, retrolateral view. 29, Leg I, prolateral view.

FIGURES 23–24. Linothele yanachanka n in Descriptions of four kleptoparasitic spiders of the genus Mysmenopsis (Araneae, Mysmenidae) and their potential host spider species in the genus Linothele (Araneae, Dipluridae) from Ecuador

FIGURES 23–24. Linothele yanachanka n. sp. 23, Female holotype, lateral view. 24, Male paratype, dorsal view.

opencc-zeroDec 2016View details →

Data from: Kleptoparasitism and scavenging can stabilize ecosystem dynamics

Scavenging is ubiquitous in nature and yet its implications for ecosystem dynamics have rarely been investigated. We used camera traps on wolf kills to investigate the role of scavenging on predator and multi-prey dynamics in a Northern Apennine system (Italy). In contrast to North American systems, throughout much of Eurasia, the omnivorous wild boar (Sus scrofa) successfully competes with wolves (Canis lupus) for the meat of their kills. We developed a deterministic multi-trophic web model (wolf, vegetation and two prey species, deer and wild boar), tunable through a parameter that governs the impact of prey-sharing between wolves and wild boar. When prey-sharing is absent or scarce, populations oscillate, but above a threshold value the trophic web is stabilized, with the regime solution becoming a fixed stable point. Both deer and wild boar then increase as a function of prey-sharing, and the impact of herbivores on the vegetation increases. When prey-sharing exceeds another threshold, however, the system collapses due to the extinction of both wolves and wild boar, but not of deer. Our analysis shows that scavenging is crucial for the dynamics of this ecosystem and thus, in general, it should not be overlooked in food web modelling. The exploitation of wolf kills by wild boar may allow juveniles and yearlings to obtain high quality resources that are not usually available, helping the omnivorous wild boar to compensate for losses caused by heavy hunting. This is likely to make them even more invasive and difficult to control.

opennotspecifiedMar 2012View details →

Fig. 2. a in Thieves in the Night: Kleptoparasitism by Fireflies in the GenusPhoturisDejean (Coleoptera: Lampyridae)

Fig. 2. a) Failed attempt at kleptoparasitism by a female Photuris that flew into the web of a large Araneus spider which had snared a male Photinus brimleyi, but the Photuris was quickly subdued and wrapped by the web owner, b) Kleptoparasitic female Photuris, which had been wrapped together with its intended prey, has removed most of its silken wrapping but remains tethered to two wrapped male Photinus fireflies. (Photos by L. Faust).