ArticleScientific reports2020
Estimation of trophic niches in myrmecophagous spider predators.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Offensive and Defensive Exploitation of Ants by Termitophagous Spiders (Araneae: Zodariidae).Integrative zoology · 2026Article
- A comparative analysis of spider prey spectra analyzed through the next-generation sequencing of individual and mixed DNA samples.Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Among spiders, taxonomically the most diversified group of terrestrial predators, only a few species are stenophagous and feed on ants. The levels of stenophagy and ant-specialisation vary among such species. To investigate whether stenophagy is only a result of a local specialisation both fundamental and realised trophic niches need to be estimated. Here we investigated trophic niches in three closely-related spider species from the family Gnaphosidae (Callilepis nocturna, C. schuszteri, Nomisia exornata) with different levels of myrmecophagy. Acceptance experiments were used to estimate fundamental trophic niches and molecular methods to estimate realised trophic niches. For the latter two PCR primer sets were used as these can affect the niche breadth estimates. The general invertebrate ZBJ primers were not appropriate for detecting ant DNA as they revealed very few prey types, therefore ant-specific primers were used. The cut-off threshold for erroneous MOTUs was identified as 0.005% of the total number of valid sequences, at individual predator level it was 0.05%. The fundamental trophic niche of Callilepis species included mainly ants, while that of N. exornata included many different prey types. The realised trophic niche in Callilepis species was similar to its fundamental niche but in N. exornata the fundamental niche was wider than realised niche. The results show that Callilepis species are ant-eating (specialised) stenophagous predators, catching mainly Formicinae ants, while N. exornata is an ant-eating euryphagous predator catching mainly Myrmicinae ants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.