A preliminary study on spider diversity from a house hold garden (artificial mixed plantation) in West Tripura, India

Article Citation: Animesh Dey, Susmita Debnath, Biplab Debbarma and PS Chaudhuri. A preliminary study on spider diversity from a house hold garden (artificial mixed plantation) in West Tripura, India. Journal of Research in Biology (2013) 3(5): 1009-1017

Jou

rn

al of R

esearch

in

Biology

A preliminary study on spider diversity from a house hold garden

(artificial mixed plantation) in West Tripura, India

Keywords: Spider diversity, artificial mixed plantation, salticidae, insect predator

ABSTRACT: Insects are the largest taxonomic group in the animal kingdom and their significant role in ecology needs no description. Spiders are exclusively predatory, hence can play a very important role in regulation of insect population in any ecosystem. Comprehensive study of spider fauna of Tripura has not been carried out yet. In our present study, we are attempting to provide relevant information regarding spiders. This information may serve as the baseline documentation for future studies in Tripura. A survey was carried out during July 2011 to January 2012 in a house garden (artificial mixed plantation) in Khayerpur of west Tripura district. A total of 47 spider species belonging to 36 genera of 14 families were collected. Among all the families, Salticidae dominated the studied assemblage and represents approximately 38% of the total species collected.

1009-1017 | JRB | 2013 | Vol 3 | No 5

This article is governed by the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/

licenses/by/2.0), which gives permission for unrestricted use, non-commercial, distribution and reproduction in all medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

www.jresearchbiology.com Journal of Research in Biology

An International

Scientific Research Journal

Authors:

Animesh Dey1*,

Susmita Debnath1, Biplab

Debbarma1, PS Chaudhuri 2.

Institution:

1. Department of Zoology,

Maharaja Bir Bikram

College, Agartala - 799004,

West Tripura

2. Department of Zoology,

Tripura University,

Suryamaninagar – 799022,

West Tripura

Corresponding author:

Animesh Dey

Email Id:

Web Address: http://jresearchbiology.com/documents/RA0361.pdf.

Dates: Received: 24 June 2013 Accepted: 18 July 2013 Published: 16 Aug 2013

Journal of Research in Biology An International Scientific Research Journal

Original Research

INTRODUCTION

The arachnids are the second largest contributor

(8.3%) of total arthropod diversity after insects. Spiders

belong to the order Araneae of class Arachnida and are

one of the diverse and functionally important predators.

Hence, spiders can play a very important role in

regulating the terrestrial arthropod populations

(Coddington and Levi, 1991). Considering, the

potentiality of spiders as bio-control agents of insect

pests and bio-indicator as well, exploration of spider

diversity need to be done with immediate effect. Since

the distribution and occurrence of spiders are greatly

related to habitat structure and vegetation parameters

(Buddle et al., 2000; de Souza and Martins, 2004;

Greenstone, 1984; Uetz, 1991; Wise, 1993), study of

spiders can be very much helpful for understanding

biodiversity patterns (Platnick, 1999). Despite of their

enormous importance in the natural ecosystem, spiders

are largely ignored in conservational studies (Chetia and

Kalita, 2012).

Now-a-days, distribution and diversity of spiders

has been studied in different parts of the world. A well

illustrated account of the diversity, beauty and intricacies

of spiders has been documented by Taylor (1999).

Although few reports on spiders from southern part of

the country are available up to some extent (Charpentier,

1996; Jose and Sebastian, 2001; Jose et al., 2006; Smith,

2004; Sugumaran et al., 2005; Vijayalakshmi and

Ahimaz, 1993), there are scanty records on diversity and

distribution of spiders in India including its north east

part as compared to other regions of the world. In NE

India, diversity of spiders approximately unexplored and

have received least attention in conservation strategies

(Singh et al., 2012). A very few documentations

(Tikader, 1970; Biswas, 2000a, 2000b, 2003, 2004,

2006, 2007) are available on spiders of north east India.

As far as the spider diversity of Tripura is concerned, it

is still not completely explored or understood. The main

aim of this study was to explore the spider species

richness in a house hold garden. Considering the duration

and plot size, this study is far from the complete

exploration of spider fauna of the state. However, it

forms the basis for further investigations on this faunal

group and reveals the importance, as well as potentiality

Dey et al., 2013

1010 Journal of Research in Biology (2013) 3(5): 1009-1017

Figure 1. Showing the study site (Khayerpur) near Agartala city

of house hold gardens as natural habitat of spider fauna.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted during July 2011 to

January 2012 in a house hold garden having an area of

80 m2 in Khayerpur (23° 50' 37.9'' N, 91° 20' 39.9'' E;

elevation 24 m) near to the Agartala city of west Tripura

district (Fig. 1). Since, polyculture house hold gardens

with such type of size are very rare in the core city of

Agartala now a days, the above site is selected for this

preliminary survey of spider fauna near to the city.

Aerial and ground hand collection methods, along with

vegetation beating was mainly used for the collection of

spider specimens. Spiders were searched visually also

under fallen tree branches, leaf litters etc. Collected

specimens were preserved in 70% ethanol for further

identification. Keys and catalogs provided by Biswas and

Biswas (1992, 2003, 2004), Sebastian and Peter (2009)

and Tikader (1987) were followed for the identification

of spider specimen.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 47 spider species were collected from

the studied house hold garden. Among the collected

species of spiders, eighteen species belong to the family

Salticidae, seven species to the family Araneidae, three

species each to the family Tetragnathidae, Lycosidae and

Thomisidae, two species each to the family Nephilidae,

Oxyopidae, Sparassidae, and Theridiidae, one species

each to the families Scytodidae, Hersiliidae, Uloboridae,

Corinnidae and Miturgidae (Table 1). India represents

438 genera (Keswani et al., 2012) from which 36 genera

were recorded during the study. Highest generic diversity

was found in Salicidae (12), Araneidae (6),

Tetragnathidae (3), Lycosidae (3) and Thomisidae (2)

(Fig. 2). Among the collected spiders, four (Cyrtophora

unicolor, Camaricus maugi, Nephila pilipes, Heteropoda

cervina) and one (Menemerus bivittatus) species of

spiders were also reported from Australia and USA

respectively (Framenau, 2013; Richman et al., 2005).

Rest are endemic to south-east Asia (Siliwal et al., 2005)

and distribution of four species (Thiania bhamoensis,

Argiope versicolor, Cyrtophora unicolor, Amyciaea

lineatipes) are reported in India for the first time

(Keshwani et al., 2012).

A total of 1686 spider species accounts with

India (Keswani et al., 2012) and 47 species are recorded

during the study from a small house hold garden.

Records on spider diversity from the other parts of the

country viz. Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Sikkim,

Calcutta and Assam (Chetia and Kalita, 2012; Singh

et al., 2012; Tikader and Biswas, 1981; Tikader, 1970,

1977, 1980) are comparable with the observations of the

present study. Highest species diversity was shown by

Salticidae, followed by Araneidae, Tetragnathidae,

Lycosidae, Thomisidae etc. (Fig. 3). Plexippus paykulli

was found to be most abundant in the studied garden

followed by Phintella vittata, Myrmarachne sp1,

Neoscona sp, Araneus mitificus, Pardosa sp, Camaricus

formosus etc. Out of total spider species recorded, about

48 % (22 species) were found to be foliage runner, 28 %

(13 species) were orb web builder, 15 % (7 species) were

ground runner, 6 % (3 species) were ambusher and 4 %

(2 species) were scattered line weber (Fig. 4).

Dey et al., 2013

Journal of Research in Biology (2013) 3(5): 1009-1017 1011

Figure 2. Showing the total number of genera

represented by different spider families

Dey et al., 2013


Table 1: List of spider species collected from the household garden during study

Family Species Distribution

Salticidae (Foliage runner)

1) Plexippus paykulli (Audouin, 1826) IND, CHN, LKA

2) Plexippus petersi (Karsch, 1878) IND, CHN, SGP

3) Phintella vittata (C. L. Koch, 1846) IND, CHN, MYS

4) Asemonea sp. IND, LKA, THA

5) Phintella versicolor (C. L. Koch, 1846) IND, CHN, MYS

6) Portia labiata (Thorell, 1887) IND, LKA, MYS

7) Epeus sp.1 IND,CHN,MYS,IDN

8) Epeus sp.2 IND,CHN,MYS,IDN

9) Menemerus bivittatus (Dufour, 1831) IND, USA

10) Thiania bhamoensis (Thorell, 1887) SGP, IDN, MYS

11) Telamonia dimidiata (Simon, 1899) IND, IDN, BTN

12) Brettus sp. IND, CHN, LKA

13) Siler sp. IND, LKA

14) Rhene danieli (Tikader, 1973) IND

15) Myrmarachne orientales (Tikader , 1973) IND, PAK

16) Myrmarachne plataleoides (Cambridge, 1869) IND, LKA, CHN

17) Myrmarachne sp.1 IND, LKA, CHN, PAK

18) Myrmarachne sp.2 IND, LKA, CHN, PAK

Araneidae (Orb web builder)

19) Neoscona sp. IND, PAK, CHN

20) Argiope versicolor (Doleschall, 1859) SGP, IDN, VNM

21) Cyclosa sp. IND, LKA, MYS

22) Cyclosa bifida (Doleschall, 1859) IND, LKA, MYS

23) Araneus mitificus (Simon, 1886) IND, PAK, BGD

24) Cyrtophora unicolor (Doleschall, 1857) LKA, PHL, AUS

25) Gasteracantha hasselti (C. L. Koch, 1837) IND, CHN

Tetragnathidae (Orb web builder)

26) Leucauge decorata (Blackwall, 1864) IND, LKA, SGP

27) Opadometa fastigiata (Simon, 1877) IND, PHL

28) Tylorida sp. IND, CHN, AUS

Lycosidae (Ground runner)

29) Lycosa mackenziei (Gravely, 1924) IND, PAK, BGD

30) Pardosa sp. SGP, THA, CHN

31) Hippasa greenalliae (Blackwall, 1867) IND, LKA, CHN

Thomisidae (Ambusher)

32) Camaricus formosus (Thorell, 1887) IND, CHN, PHL

33) Camaricus maugi (Walckenaer, 1837) IND, LKA, AUS

34) Amyciaea lineatipes (Cambridge, 1901) SGP, IDN

35) Nephila kuhlii (Doleschall 1859) IND, LKA, SGP Nephilidae (Orb web builder)

36) Nephila pilipes (Fabricius, 1793) IND, CHN, AUS

According to earlier reports, the spider fauna of

Tripura is represented by 6 families, 15 genera and 27

species (Biswas and Majumder, 2000). Present study

represents 14 families, 36 genera and 47 species (plate 1

and 2), collected from a small house hold garden during

a very small survey, among which 45 species were

reported for the first time from the state. Since, the

present study is not focused on specific spider families

like the previous authors, who studied only six families

(Araneidae, Oxyopidae, Tetragnathidae, Salticidae,

Lycosidae and Heteropodidae) and the survey is carried

out in a natural habitat of spiders, greater species

richness is observed. Hence this study reveals the

potentiality of Tripura state as the reservoir of large

Dey et al., 2013


Figure 4. Graph showing the number of species

represented by different types of spiders

Hersiliidae

Oxyopidae

(Foliage runner)

37) Oxyopes birmanicus (Thorell 1887) IND, LKA, MYS

38) Oxyopes javanus (Thorell 1887) IND, CHN, PHL

Sparassidae

(Ground runner)

39) Heteropoda venatoria (Latreille, 1802) IND, JPN

40) Heteropoda cervina (C. L. Koch, 1875) IND, AUS

Theridiidae

(Scattered line weber)

41) Chrysso sp. IND, CHN, JPN

42) Ariamnes sp. IND, AUS

Scytodidae

(Ground runner)

43) Scytodes pallida (Doleschall 1859) IND, CHN, PHL

Hersiliidae

(Foliage runner)

44) Hersilia sp. IND, LKA, MMR

Uloboridae

(Orb web builder)

45) Zosis sp. IND, TWN

Corinnidae

(Ground runner)

46) Castianeira sp. IND, BGD, BTN

Miturgidae

(Foliage runner)

47) Cheiracanthium danieli Tikader, 1975 IND

Abbreviations: IND – India, CHN - China, LKA – Sri Lanka, SGP – Singapore, MYS – Malaysia, THA –

Thailand, IDN – Indonesia, USA – United States, BTN – Bhutan, PAK – Pakistan, VNM – Viet Nam, BGD –

Bangladesh, PHL – Philippines, AUS – Australia, JPN – Japan, MMR – Myanmar, TWN – Taiwan

Figure 3. Percentage of total species diversity

shared by shared by different spider families

spider diversity. Inter-specific variation in coloration

among different spiders might be linked with different

environmental effects and behavioral patterns observed

on them (Craig and Ebert, 1994; Hoese et al., 2006;

Huber, 2002; Oxford and Gillespie, 1998).

CONCLUSION

Ecological as well as taxonomic information on

Indian spiders are lacking up to a great extent and studies

of spiders on these regards are completely untouched in

Tripura, NE India. Checklist or records of these spiders

are not yet prepared. However, spiders can be considered

as the most efficient one, among the few bio-indicator

species in ecological studies (Kapoor, 2008; Noss, 1990).

Relationship between spider distribution with habitat

patterns and its various patterns of responses to the

different disturbances create complexities in using them

as indicator species (Chetia and Kalita, 2012). This study


Dey et al., 2013

Plate 1. (1) Plexippus paykulli (2) Plexippus petersi (3) Phintella vittata (4) Asemonea sp. (5) Phintella versicolor

(6) Portia labiata (7) Epeus sp.1 (8) Epeus sp.2 (9) Menemerus bivittatus (10) Thiania bhamoensis (11)

Telamonia dimidiata (12) Brettus sp. (13) Siler sp. (14) Rhene danieli (15) Myrmarachne orientales (16)

Myrmarachne plataleoides (17) Myrmarachne sp.1 (18) Myrmarachne sp.2 (19) Neoscona sp. (20) Argiope

versicolor (21) Cyclosa sp. (22) Cyclosa bifida (23) Araneus mitificus (24) Cyrtophora unicolor

shows information related to the species distribution in a

particular habitat and the importance of house hold

gardens in maintaining and conserving spider diversity.

The study also reveals the potentiality of the state as the

reservoir of diversified spider fauna. Detailed studies on

the spider fauna of the state and inclusion of spiders in

conservational strategies are recommended.

REFERENCES

Biswas B and Biswas K. 2006. Araneae: Spiders. Fauna

of Arunachal Pradesh, State Fauna Series. Zoological

Survey of India. 13(2): 491-518.


of Manipur, State Fauna Series. Zoological Survey of

India. 13(2): 25-46.


of Mizoram, State Fauna Series 14. Zoological Survey of

India. 455-475.


of Sikkim, State Fauna Series. Zoological Survey of

India. 9(2): 67-100.

Biswas B and Biswas K. 1992. Fauna of West Bengal

(Araneae: Spiders), State Fauna Series 3. Zoological

Survey of India. 357-500.

Biswas B and Majumder SC. 2000a. Arachnida:

Araneae. Fauna of Tripura, State Fauna Series.

Zoological Survey of India. 7(2): 113-122.

Biswas B and Majumder SC. 2000b. Araneae: Spider.

Fauna of Meghalaya, State Fauna Series. Zoological

Plate 2. (25) Gasteracantha hasselti (26) Leucauge decorata (27) Opadometa fastigiata (28) Tylorida sp. (29)

Lycosa mackenziei (30) Pardosa sp. (31) Hippasa greenalliae (32) Camaricus formosus (33) Camaricus maugi

(34) Amyciaea lineatipes (35) Nephila kuhlii (36) Nephila pilipes (37) Oxyopes birmanicus (38) Oxyopes

javanus (39) Heteropoda venatoria (40) Heteropoda cervina (41) Chrysso sp. (42) Ariamnes sp. (43) Scytodes

pallida (44) Hersilia sp. (45) Zosis sp. (46) Castianeira sp. (47) Cheiracanthium danieli


Dey et al., 2013

Survey of India. 4(2): 93-128.

Buddle CM, Spence JR and Langor DW. 2000.

Succession of boreal spider assemblages following

wildfire and harvesting. Ecography. 23(4): 424–436.

Charpentier P. 1996. The illustrated re-description of

Poecilotheria rufilata Pocock, 1899. Exothermae

Magazine, Exothermae Publishing, Belgium. No. 0

(special edition), 34P.

Chetia P and Kalita DK. 2012. Diversity and

distribution of spiders from Gibbon Wildlife Sanctuary,

Assam, India. Indian Society of Arachnology. 1(1):130-

142.

Coddington JA and Levi HW. 1991. Systematics and

evolution of spiders (Araneae). Annual Review of

Ecology and Systematics. 22: 565-592.

Craig CL and Ebert K. 1994. Colour and pattern in

predator-prey interactions: the bright body colours and

patterns of a tropical orb spinning spider attract flower-

seeking prey. Functional Ecology. 8(5): 616-620.

De Souza ALT and Martins RP. 2004. Distribution of

plant-dwelling spiders: inflorescences versus vegetative

branches. Austral Ecology. 29(3): 342–349.

Framenau VW. 2013. Checklist of Australian Spiders,

Version 1.22. Available at: www.australasian-

arachnology.org.

Greenstone MH. 1984. Determinants of web spider

species diversity: vegetation structural diversity vs. prey

availability. Oecologia. 62(3): 299–304.

Hoese FJ, Law EAJ, Rao D and Herberstein ME.

2006. Distinctive yellow bands on a sit-and-wait

predator: prey attractant or camouflage? Behavior. 143

(6): 763-781.

Hauber ME. 2002. Conspicuous colouration attracts

prey to a stationary predator. Ecological Entomology. 27

(6): 686-691.

Jose SK and Sebastian PA. 2001. Occurrence of

Psechrus alticeps Pocock (Araneae: Psechridae) in

Western Ghats, Kerala with a re-description and notes on

its habit and habitat. Journal of the Bombay Natural

History Society. 98: 304-306.

Jose SK, Sudhikumar AV, Davis S and Sebastian PA

(In press). 2006. Preliminary studies on the spider fauna

(Arachnida: Araneae) in Parambikulam wildlife

sanctuary in Western Ghats, Kerala, India. Journal of the

Bombay Natural History Society. 102 (3).

Kapoor V. 2008. Effects of rainforest fragmentation and

shade-coffee plantations on spider communities in the

Western Ghats, India. Journal of Insect Conservation. 12

(1): 53-68.

Keswani S, Hadole P and Rajoria A. 2012. Checklist

of Spiders (Arachnida: Araneae) from India. Indian

Journal of Arachnology. 1(1) 1-129.

Noss RF. 1990. ‘Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a

hierarchical approach’. Conservation Biology. 4(4): 355-

364.

Oxford GS and Gillespie RG. 1998. Evolution and

ecology of spider coloration. Annual Review on

Entomology. 43: 619-643.

Platnick NI. 1999. Dimensions of biodiversity: targeting

megadiverse groups. The Living Planet in Crisis:

Biodiversity Science and Policy. (J. Cracraft & F.T.

Grifo, eds.). Columbia University Press, New York. 33-

52.

Richman DB, Edwards GB and Cutler B. 2005.

"Salticidae". Spiders of North America: an identification

manual. (D. Ubick, P. Paquin, P. E. Cushing & V. Roth,

eds.) American Arachnological Society. 205–216.


Dey et al., 2013

Sebastian PA and Peter KV. 2009. Spiders of India.

Universities press, India. 614.

Siliwal M, Molur S & Biswas BK. 2005. Indian Spiders

(Arachnida: Araneae): Updated Checklist 2005. ZOOS’

PRINT JOURNAL. 20(10): 1999-2049.

Singh S, Borkotoki A and Sarmah CK. 2012. Species

distribution of spiders in Barpeta district of Assam: a

diversity measure. E-International Scientific Research

Journal. 4(1): 47-57.

Smith AM. 2004. A new species of the arboreal

theraphosid, genus Poecilotheria, from southern India

(Araneae, Mygalomorphae, Theraphosidae) with notes

on its conservation status. Journal of British Tarantula

Society. 19(2): 48-61.

Sugumaran MP, Ganeshkumar M and Ramasamy K.

2005. Biodiversity of spiders in Western Ghats of Tamil

Nadu. Entomon. 30(2):157-163.

Taylor B. Ed. 1999. Spiders. Lorenz Books, New York.

64.

Tikader BK. 1970. Spider fauna of Sikkim. Records of

the Zoological Survey of India. 64: 1-83.

Tikader BK. 1987. Handbook of Indian Spiders.

Calcutta Zoological Survey of India, India. 251.

Tikader BK and Biswas B. 1981. Spider fauna of

Calcutta and vicinity: Part I. Records of Zoological

Survey of India Occ. Pap. 30: 1-149.

Tikader BK. 1977. Studies on spider fauna of Andaman

and Nicobar islands, Indian Ocean. Records of

Zoological Survey of India. 72: 153-212.

Tikader BK. 1980. Thomisidae (Crab-spiders). Fauna of

India (Araneae). 1: 1-247

Uetz GW. 1991. Habitat structure and spider foraging.

Habitat Structure: The Physical Arrangement of Objects

in Space. (E.D. McCoy, S.S. Bell and H.R. Mushinsky,

eds.). Chapman and Hall, London. 325-348.

Vijayalakshmi K and Ahimaz P. 1993. Spiders: An

Introduction. Cre-A Madras. 112.

Wise DH. 1993. Spiders in Ecological Webs. University

Press, Cambridge, UK. 342.

Submit your articles online at www.jresearchbiology.com

Advantages

Easy online submission Complete Peer review Affordable Charges Quick processing Extensive indexing You retain your copyright

[email protected]

www.jresearchbiology.com/Submit.php.


Dey et al., 2013