Invasive Widow Spiders Perform Differently at Low Temperatures from Conspecifics from the Native Range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Temperature challenges are one of the leading abiotic causes of success or failure of non-native species in a novel environment, and this is particularly true for low temperatures. Establishing and reproducing in a novel thermal environment can alter survival, behavior, and traits related to fitness. It has been proposed that plasticity or adaptation of thermal tolerance may allow an introduced species to thrive, or that successful invaders may be those with a thermal breadth in their native habitat that encompasses their new environment. Here, we tested these hypotheses using native and invasive populations of Australian redback spiders (Latrodectus hasselti). We measured how exposure to temperatures common to invasive and native range habitats (exposure to 15 and 25°C, respectively) affected behavioral and life-history traits and trade-offs that may underlie fitness in an invasive population detected in 1995 in Japan and a native population from Australia. We found that the critical thermal minimum (CTmin) was higher in the invasive population from Japan than in the native population, but critical thermal maximum (CTmax) did not differ between populations. Compared to the invasive population, eggs from the native population had a longer development time and lower hatching success at 15°C. Both populations performed equally well at 25°C, as measured by egg development time and hatching success. Invasive juveniles tested at 15°C were faster to explore a novel environment and bolder compared to those tested at 25°C. In comparison, the native population showed faster average exploration, with no differences in boldness or exploration at the two development or testing temperatures. Overall, L. hasselti from Japan maintained hatching success and development across a wider temperature range than the native population, indicating greater thermal breadth and higher behavioral plasticity. These results support the importance of plasticity in thermal tolerance and behavior for a successful invasion under novel environmental temperatures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".