Geological variation in particle surface-roughness preference in the case-bearing caddisflies
Optimality modeling suggests that the choice of resources often represents the best achievable balance of costs and benefits. However, there is no empirical data describing the effect of resource availability on the development of the material choice behavior during construction of a biological structure. Cylindrical case-bearing caddisfly larvae prefer smooth-surface particles to allow construction of a smooth interior case wall. We evaluated the relationship between case material preference and the local availability of sand particle species in 7 distant populations of 2 odontocerid species, Psilotreta kisoensis and Perissoneura paradoxa. The field survey revealed that all populations selectively used the smooth particles from the surrounding sediment to construct their cases. However, when comparing among populations, the larvae originating from areas with relatively few smooth particles constructed cases using rougher particles. We then forced the larvae to choose from a mixture of equal amounts of 2 artificial particles that had different textures (rough and smooth). The preference for smooth artificial particles was lower in populations that naturally incorporated rougher particles in their cases. Our results are consistent with the predictions of optimal foraging theory as the populations living in areas with abundant smooth particles had a stronger preference for smoothness than those in areas where such particles were rare. The abundance of smooth particles in the sediment depended on its mineralogical/petrological origin. Thus, we suggest that material preference is influenced by local geology. Our results provide important insight into the mechanisms controlling construction behavior. Copyright 2011, Oxford University Press.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 22 (2011)
Issue (Month): 5 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://beheco.oxfordjournals.org/
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.oup.co.uk/journals|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:22:y:2011:i:5:p:1053-1063. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.