Spider-fed bromeliads: seasonal and interspecific variation in plant performance

Background and Aims Several animals that live on bromeliads can contribute to plant nutrition through nitrogen provisioning (digestive mutualism). The bromeliad-living spider Psecas chapoda (Salticidae) inhabits and breeds on Bromelia balansae in regions of South America, but in specific regions can also appear on Ananas comosus (pineapple) plantations and Aechmea distichantha. Methods Using isotopic and physiological methods in greenhouse experiments, the role of labelled ((15)N) spider faeces and Drosophila melanogaster flies in the nutrition and growth of each host plant was evaluated, as well as seasonal variation in the importance of this digestive mutualism. Key Results Spiders contributed 0.6 +/- 0.2% (mean +/- s.e.; dry season) to 2.7 +/- 1% (wet season) to the total nitrogen in B. balansae, 2.4 +/- 0.4% (dry) to 4.1 +/- 0.3% (wet) in An. comosus and 3.8 +/- 0.4% (dry) to 5 +/- 1% (wet) in Ae. distichantha. In contrast, flies did not contribute to the nutrition of these bromeliads. Chlorophylls and carotenoid concentrations did not differ among treatments. Plants that received faeces had higher soluble protein concentrations and leaf growth (RGR) only during the wet season. Conclusions These results indicate that the mutualism between spiders and bromeliads is seasonally restricted, generating a conditional outcome. There was interspecific variation in nutrient uptake, probably related to each species` performance and photosynthetic pathways. Whereas B. balansae seems to use nitrogen for growth, Ae. distichantha apparently stores nitrogen for stressful nutritional conditions. Bromeliads absorbed more nitrogen coming from spider faeces than from flies, reinforcing the beneficial role played by predators in these digestive mutualisms.

Effects of detectability on estimates of geographic range size in bignonieae

Extinction risk has not been evaluated for 96% of all described plant species. Given that the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation proposes preliminary conservation assessments of all described plant species by 2010, herbarium specimens (i.e., primary occurrence data) are increasingly being used to infer threat components from estimates of geographic range size. Nevertheless, estimates of range size based on herbarium data may be inaccurate due to collection bias associated with interspecific variation in detectability. We used data on 377 species of Bignonieae to test the hypothesis that there is a positive relationship between detectability and estimates of geographic range size derived from herbarium specimens. This relationship is expected if the proportion of the true geographic range size of a species that is documented by herbarium specimens is given by the product of the true geographic range size and the detectability of the species, assuming no relationship between true geographic range size and detectability. We developed 4 measures of detectability that can be estimated from herbarium data and examined the relationship between detectability and 2 types of estimates of geographic range size: area of occupancy and extent of occurrence. Our results from regressing estimates of extent of occurrence and area of occupancy on detectability across genera provided no support for this hypothesis. The same was true for regressions of estimated extent of occurrence on detectability across species within genera. Nevertheless, regressions of estimated area of occupancy on detectability across species within genera provided partial support for our hypothesis. We considered 3 possible explanations for this mixed outcome: violation of the assumption of no relationship between true geographic range size and detectability; the relationships between estimated geographic range size and detectability may be an artifact of a negative relationship between estimated area of occupancy and the sampling variance of detectability; detectability may have had 2 opposite effects on estimated species range sizes: one determines the proportion of the true range of a species documented by herbarium specimens and the other determines the distribution of true range size for the species actually observed with herbarium data. Our findings should help improve understanding of the potential biases incurred with the use of herbarium data.