The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 20 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Assassin bug uses aggressive mimicry to lure spider prey
Open accessAbstract
Assassin bugs (Stenolemus bituberus) hunt web-building spiders by invading the web and plucking the silk to generate vibrations that lure the resident spider into striking range. To test whether vibrations generated by bugs aggressively mimic the vibrations generated by insect prey, we compared the responses of spiders to bugs with how they responded to prey, courting male spiders and leaves falling into the web. We also analysed the associated vibrations. Similar spider orientation and approach behaviours were observed in response to vibrations from bugs and prey, whereas different behaviours were observed in response to vibrations from male spiders and leaves. Peak frequency and duration of vibrations generated by bugs were similar to those generated by prey and courting males. Further, vibrations from bugs had a temporal structure and amplitude that were similar to vibrations generated by leg and body movements of prey and distinctly different to vibrations from courting males or leaves, or prey beating their wings. To be an effective predator, bugs do not need to mimic the full range of prey vibrations. Instead bugs are general mimics of a subset of prey vibrations that fall within the range of vibrations classified by spiders as ‘prey’.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Assassin bugs (Stenolemus bituberus) lure web-building spiders by plucking silk to generate vibrations that spiders treat like struggling prey. The vibrations resemble a subset of prey-generated vibrations rather than a specific prey model, supporting aggressive mimicry as a general lure.
Key findings
- Spiders responded similarly to bugs and prey: vinegar flies versus bugs, p = 0.56; aphids versus bugs, p = 0.65; vinegar flies versus aphids, p = 1.00, whereas responses to courting males and leaves were significantly different (all p < 0.01).
- Spiders tended not to respond to leaves (65% no response), and female spiders responded to courting male vibrations by adopting a copulatory position.
- Vibrations from bugs had peak frequencies similar to those from prey and courting males, but bugs generated lower amplitudes than prey or leaves; after excluding initial impact vibrations, bug amplitudes only overlapped those of courting males.
- Linear discriminant analysis found significant variation among vibration sources, with 33.08% of vibrations misclassified, and the authors conclude bugs are general mimics of a subset of prey-like vibrations rather than specific prey mimics.
Methods
- Recorded spider responses and web vibrations in Achaearanea sp. webs to hunting S. bituberus bugs, struggling Drosophila melanogaster and aphids, courting male spiders, and leaves falling into webs; 20 examples each were recorded for bugs, vinegar flies, aphids, and leaves, plus 5 courting males.
- Used a laser vibrometer synchronized with video to measure frequency, amplitude, duration, and temporal structure of vibrations; analyzed responses with Fisher’s exact tests, repeated-measures MANOVA/ANOVA, Tukey’s tests, and linear discriminant analysis, applying Box-Cox transformations when data deviated from normality.
Limitations
- Stated in the paper: the physics of vibration propagation in three-dimensional webs is not well understood, and sample sizes varied slightly depending on whether a particular variable could be calculated from a vibration.
- Evident from the text: the study is laboratory-based, uses one spider genus (Achaearanea sp.), and has a small sample of courting males (n = 5), with no field validation reported.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
26 Own result · 12 Own interpretation · 11 Sources not found · 7 Own method · 4 No basis given
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Vibrations generated by bugs occupied a narrower band of frequencies compared with the much more variable and often higher-frequency vibrations from both types of prey.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition to wing-beating, prey ensnared in the web also make smaller-amplitude, slower movements such as pulling a leg or moving the head or thorax, which generate much lower-frequency and -amplitude vibrations.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The only occasions when we observed spiders directly approaching prey were immediately after high-amplitude vibrations.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Linear discriminant analysis showed that there was significant variation in frequency, amplitude and duration of vibrations generated by hunting bugs, struggling vinegar flies and aphids, courting male spiders and leaves falling into webs (Wilks's lambda: approx. F 12,12 610 ¼ 328.07, p , 0.01).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Repeated-measures ANOVA on vibration amplitude showed that bugs generated lower amplitudes than prey or leaves in webs ( F 84,4706 ¼ 64.51, p , 0.01; see figure 3 a for Tukey's tests).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition to these vibrations, male spiders also generated a repeated, distinctive vibration (figure 4 h ) that was never observed from any of the other sources.”
- Also stated in: § 4. DISCUSSION · plain
“Courting males (the source that generated vibrations with the most overlap in peak frequency distribution with the prey) generate a temporally distinctive pattern that was not observed from any other source throughout interactions with females (figure 4 h ).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 4. DISCUSSION · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When these initial impact vibrations were excluded from the analyses, the amplitudes generated by bugs only overlapped those of courting males ( F 71,4634 ¼ 69.96, p , 0.01; see figure 3 c for Tukey's tests).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Vibrations generated by bugs (figure 4 a ) were most similar to the short, low-amplitude vibrations generated by prey moving their body or limbs (figure 4 c , d ) and courting males (figure 4 g ).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“How spiders responded to bugs was extremely similar to how spiders responded to prey (Fisher's exact tests, vinegar flies versus bugs: p ¼ 0.56; aphids versus bugs: p ¼ 0.65; vinegar flies versus aphids, p ¼ 1.00).”
- Also stated in: § Assassin bug uses aggressive mimicry to lure spider prey · plain
“Similar spider orientation and approach behaviours were observed in response to vibrations from bugs and prey”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Assassin bug uses aggressive mimicry to lure spider prey · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Repeated-measures ANOVA on the peak frequencies showed that the vibrations generated by bugs plucking silk and vinegar flies struggling in the web were of significantly higher peak frequency than those generated by leaves falling in the web ( F 84,4704 ¼ 58.89, p , 0.01; see figure 2 for Tukey's tests).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This response was never observed towards bugs or the other sources”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The vibrations generated by bugs showed clear structural similarities to those generated by prey struggling in the web.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Repeated-measures ANOVA on vibration duration generated a significant overall model ( F 84,4714 ¼ 30.38, p , 0.01) but found no evidence of differences among the sources ( F 4,80 ¼ 2.25, p ¼ 0.07).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A repeatedmeasures ANOVA on interval between vibrations also generated a significant overall model (whole model: F 71,4625 ¼ 16.78, p , 0.01) but again found no evidence of differences among the sources ( F 4,67 ¼ 1.14, p ¼ 0.34).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Initial amplitudes generated by bugs and courting males were lower than those from prey or leaves ( F 4,81 ¼ 96.15, p , 0.01; see figure 3 b for Tukey's tests).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The responses of spiders to prey in the web were occasionally characterized by a direct and rapid approach towards prey without pauses.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Spiders tended not to respond to leaves (65% no response)”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Repeated-measures MANOVA revealed significant differences in the frequency, amplitude and duration of vibrations generated by each source (whole model: F 4,4768 ¼ 48.26, p , 0.01).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, there were no significant differences in the peak frequency of vibrations generated by bugs and the two prey types or courting males.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“female spiders responded to male courtship by entering a characteristic copulatory position.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, amplitudes generated by courting males also overlapped with those generated by the two prey.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The distinctive responses of spiders to leaves and courting males indicate that they can readily discern differences between these stimuli.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Assassin bugs ( Stenolemus bituberus ) hunt web-building spiders by invading the web and plucking the silk to generate vibrations that lure the resident spider into striking range.”
- Also stated in: § 1. INTRODUCTION · plain
“When stalking, they slowly approach the spider until within striking range and when luring they use their forelegs to pluck the silk threads, which lures the resident spider to within striking range [24-26].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [24]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [25]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [26]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 1. INTRODUCTION · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“an assassin bug (hereafter 'bug') that uses two distinct predatory strategies, stalking and luring, to hunt web-building spiders [24,25]”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [24]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [25]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The tendency of bugs to generate vibrations in the lower-frequency and -amplitude range produced by prey may be adaptive.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The presence of subsequent vibrations may provide spiders with a means to discriminate between debris and prey.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Rather than aggressively mimicking a specific prey model, bugs are best interpreted as general mimics that exploit a bias in spiders to approach prey-like vibrations in the web.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This tendency supports the interpretation of luring behaviour of bugs as aggressive mimicry of prey.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Vinegar flies can beat their wings at up to 185 times per second during flight [30].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [30]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This distinctive vibration would provide females with the means to discriminate males from other stimuli.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This risk may be considerably increased when the spider approaches rapidly and without pause.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Bugs pluck, stretch and cut silk threads very slowly with their forelegs, using lowamplitude movements [26].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [26]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and may be elicited by the presence of higher-frequency and -amplitude vibrations in the struggles of prey.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To a spider, the vibrations generated by bugs may resemble small or exhausted prey that cannot mount high-amplitude or high-frequency struggles.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These behaviours do not generate the higher-frequency and -amplitude vibrations observed in impact or wing beating of prey or courtship vibrations of courting males.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 17
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
- Probably not a substantial claim. 10
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was substantial overlap in the frequency, amplitude and/or duration of vibrations generated by each source, with 33.08 per cent of vibrations misclassified (i.e. resembling more than one vibration source; electronic supplementary material).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Spiders are dangerous prey, and we have observed bugs being counter-attacked, killed and eaten by the spider they were hunting [24,25].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [24]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [25]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Spider responses to other vibration sources were significantly different (all p , 0.01; figure 1).”
- Also stated in: § Assassin bug uses aggressive mimicry to lure spider prey · plain
“whereas different behaviours were observed in response to vibrations from male spiders and leaves.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § Assassin bug uses aggressive mimicry to lure spider prey · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were no significant differences among vibration sources in the response latency (i.e. time elapsing from the last vibration until the spider responded; whole model F 4,67 ¼ 1.84, p ¼ 0.13) or in the number of vibrations preceding the spider's response ( F 4,67 ¼ 1.11, p ¼ 0.36).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Wing beats of struggling prey were of much higher amplitude, of longer duration, and of both more variable and higher frequency than body and limb movements; again, such vibrations were never observed from bugs (figure 4 i , j ).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Leaves falling into the web generated a high-amplitude pulse of vibration on the initial impact with the web, but rarely generated any subsequent vibrations.”
- Also stated in: § ( b ) Vibratory characteristics of stimuli · plain
“After the initial impact, leaves made few, if any, subsequent vibrations in the web.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § ( b ) Vibratory characteristics of stimuli · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While prey also generate an initial high-amplitude vibration upon impact with the web, they also produce numerous vibrations after impact as they struggle.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, prey continued generating high-amplitude vibrations from wing beating and low-amplitude vibrations from movements of the limbs and body.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The initial vibrations generated by both prey and leaves were characterized by a single high-amplitude vibration generated by impact with the web (figure 4 b , e , f ), and such vibrations were never observed in bugs or males.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While there were some similarities to the vibrations generated by leaves and courting males, these vibrations also show clear differences in fine structure to those generated by bugs and prey.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Web-building spiders rely on vibrations in their webs to detect, identify and locate intercepted prey, and respond in a characteristic and predictable manner [14-17].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [14]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [15]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [16]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [17]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Bugs hence appear to aggressively mimic a broad class of prey-like vibrations that are effective at soliciting approaches but are also unlikely to elicit highly aggressive, dangerous responses.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“While bugs hunt web-building spiders from several genera they most often hunt spiders from the genus Achaearanea (Theridiidae [24]) and use luring to bring these spiders within range of attack [25].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [24]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [25]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Trials in which the leaf did not stick to the web were aborted.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Care was taken not to damage the web. If damage did occur, the web was set aside and was not used in trials until the following day, allowing the spider time to repair the damage.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If the prey did not stick in the web, we aborted the trial and set up a new spider.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“These wings were used as focal points for the laser vibrometer to record transverse vibrations, while minimizing the loading on the web [17].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [17]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“To date, only one previous study has demonstrated a resemblance between vibratory signals used by web-invading spiders to manipulate prey spider behaviour and those generated by prey struggling in the prey spider's web [23].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [23]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recordings began 5 min after placing wings in the web, during which time the spider could settle down if it had been disturbed during the set-up of equipment.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Individual spiders were housed in the laboratory inside wooden frames (20 -20 -3 cm) for at least 2 days before being used in a trial, allowing them to build webs.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“In a three-dimensional web such as that of Achaearanea , this can generate vibrations in the high-frequency range observed, whereas in two-dimensional webs the frequencies generated by prey appear to be much lower (compare [31] with [17]).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [31]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [17]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“When data deviated significantly from a normal distribution, we used a Box-Cox transformation [27].”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [27]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the physics of vibration propagation in three-dimensional webs is not well understood, the behaviour of prey is able to generate higher-frequency vibrations in the web than is observed from bugs.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Trials were aborted if hunting did not begin within 30 min.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Experiments were conducted inside a sound-attenuating chamber (1.8 -1.8 -2 m) on a vibration-isolating table (Kinetic Systems, USA) under full spectrum lighting.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
The spiders' responses to the treatments are mediated by web vibrations alone, not by visual or other cues from the source.
“Web-building spiders rely on vibrations in their webs to detect, identify and locate intercepted prey, and respond in a characteristic and predictable manner [14-17].”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ ( b ) Vibratory characteristics of stimuli
“We also compared amplitudes of the first vibration generated in the web of each recording, as these include the initial 'impact' with the web. Initial amplitudes generated by bugs and courting males were lower than those from prey or leaves ( F 4,81 ¼ 96.15, p , 0.01; see figure 3 b for Tukey's tests).”
§ ( a ) Study animals
“We recorded 20 examples each of hunting by bugs, struggles of vinegar flies and aphids, and leaves falling into the web. We also recorded five examples of courting male spiders.”
Citations
Cites
An Analysis of Transformations
Box, G. E. P., & Cox, D. R. (1964) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Statistical Methodology) · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1964.tb00553.x · Cited by 15,356
Wickler, W. (1968) · Max Planck Digital Library · Cited by 522
Flash Signal Evolution, Mate Choice, and Predation in Fireflies
Lewis, S. M., & Cratsley, C. K. (2007) · Annual Review of Entomology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.53.103106.093346 · Cited by 336
Mimicry in Plants and Animals.
Clarke, C. A., & Wickler, W. (1969) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.2307/2401303 · Cited by 320
Morphological phylogeny of cobweb spiders and their relatives (Araneae, Araneoidea, Theridiidae)
Agnarsson, I. (2004) · Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society · doi:10.1111/j.1096-3642.2004.00120.x · Cited by 299
Why are there good and poor mimics?
Edmunds, M. (2000) · Biological Journal of the Linnean Society · doi:10.1006/bijl.1999.0425 · Cited by 247
Aggressive Chemical Mimicry by a Bolas Spider
Eberhard, W. G. (1977) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.198.4322.1173 · Cited by 172
Aggressive Mimicry inPhoturisFireflies: Signal Repertoires by Femmes Fatales
Lloyd, J. E. (1975) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.187.4175.452 · Cited by 169
Vane-Wright, R. I. (1980) · Biological Journal of the Linnean Society · doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.1980.tb00066.x · Cited by 147
Vibrations in the orb web of the spider Nephila clavipes: cues for discrimination and orientation
Landolfa, M. A., & Barth, F. G. (1996) · Journal of Comparative Physiology A · doi:10.1007/bf00192316 · Cited by 142
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hwang, W. S., & Weirauch, C. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0045523 · Cited by 215
“wide repertoire of innovative prey capture strategies [3,4,5,6,7].”
BackgroundSignals, cues and the nature of mimicry
Jamie, G. A. (2017) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2016.2080 · Cited by 105
Venoms of Heteropteran Insects: A Treasure Trove of Diverse Pharmacological Toolkits
Walker, A. A., Weirauch, C., Fry, B. G., et al. (2016) · Toxins · doi:10.3390/toxins8020043 · Cited by 95
“Araneophagic emesine bugs have evolved convergently to araneophagic spiders [117] in developing a form of aggressive mimicry in which plucking of web strands is used to produce vibrations that manipulate the behaviour of the prey spider [118–121].”
BackgroundThe evolutionary ecology of deception
Mökkönen, M., & Lindstedt, C. (2015) · Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · doi:10.1111/brv.12208 · Cited by 95
“In aggressive mimicry, predators or parasites rely on a deceptive tactic by falsely imitating a signal to ‘trap’ their prey, such as with the assassin bug that hunts web-building spiders by mimicking vibrations of insect prey (Ruxton et al., 2004; Marshall & Hill, 2009; Wignall & Taylor, 2011).”
BackgroundAvian vocal mimicry: a unified conceptual framework
Dalziell, A. H., Welbergen, J. A., Igic, B., & Magrath, R. D. (2014) · Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · doi:10.1111/brv.12129 · Cited by 84
“Similarly, common acoustic features of the environment may also lead to similar vocalisations (e.g. Wiley, 1991; Badyaev & Leaf, 1997), although a high degree of resemblance is unlikely in this case.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Wignall, A. E., & Taylor, P. W.
- Affiliations
- Macquarie University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Wignall, Anne E.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2010-10-27
- Volume
- 278
- Issue
- 1710
- Pages
- 1427-1433
- ISSN
- 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
- 0962-8452
- 1471-2954
- PMC
- PMC3061146
- OpenAlex
- W2108076213
- Semantic Scholar
- ef9e6e53aeb2c79cc5a68583add2f49f7ebab39e
- Cited by
- 71
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 2.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Spider Taxonomy and Behavior Studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Insect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
- Keywords
- Reduviidae, aggressive mimicry, spider predation, web vibration, web-building spiders, insect predation
- MeSH terms
- Aggression, Animals, Animal Communication, Female, Male, Predatory Behavior, Spiders, Vibration, Reduviidae, Food Chain
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-27, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-27 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
