l situation, or in calm weather, the position of the web is therefore unlikely to be exactly replicated from night to night. In the observations reported here, I discounted small changes in web sites, as did, for example, Enders (1975) in the studies listed in Table 1 and possibly others who did not report on the precise details. However, in a habitat where supports are widely separated, even the relocation of a single support line may significantly change the web position and so could be considered as relocation (e.g., Nakata & Ushimaru 2004). Such heterogeneity in recording protocol and in spider behavior makes detailed comparisons between studies difficult. Nevertheless trends do emerge from this range of data and, in particular, the new data on Poltys add support to the findings of previous authors who suggested the connection between long residencies, random patterns of movement, and a high cost of relocation due to predation risks. Among the species with long web site residence times the precise modus operandi of the threat differs between the two diurnal species, N. clavipes and C. octotuberculata, but the requirement for effective camouflage may well be the key factor for both of the nocturnally active, diurnally cryptic species, T. elongata and P. noblei. Despite presenting interesting challenges, nocturnal and/or cryptic spiders provide useful insights into otherwise hidden facets of predator prey interactions.
New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service staff members were most helpful in arranging access to sites in Kuring-gai Chase NP. Mariella Herberstein kindly advised on thesis material and on an early draft of the current manuscript; Mike Gray was extremely helpful on a later draft. The project was supported by the Australian Museum, The University of Sydney, and awards from the Joyce W. Vickery Scientific Research Fund administered through the Linnean Society of New South Wales. Doctoral supervisors Mike Gray and Harley Rose and partner/colleague Graham Milledge provided help and support throughout.
Coville, R.E. 1987. Spider-hunting sphecid wasps. Pp. 309-318. In Ecophysiology of Spiders. (W. Nentwig, ed.). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
Enders, F. 1973. Selection of habitat by the spider Argiope aurantia Lucas. American Midland Naturalist 90:47-55.
Enders, F. 1975. Change of web site in Argiope spiders (Araneidae). American Midland Naturalist 94:484-490.
Enders, F. 1976. Effects of prey capture, web destruction and habitat physiognomy on web-site tenacity of Argiope spiders (Araneidae). Journal of Arachnology 3:75-82.
Gillespie, R.G. & T. Caraco. 1987. Risk-sensitive foraging strategies of two spider populations. Ecology 68:887-899.
Hodge, M.A. 1987a. Macrohabitat selection by the orb weaving spider, Micrathena gracilis. Psyche 94:347-361.
Hodge, M.A. 1987b. Factors influencing web site residence time of the orb-weaving spider, Micrathena gracilis. Psyche 94:363-371.
Janetos, A.C. 1982a. Foraging tactics of two guilds of web-spinning spiders. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 10:19-27.
Janetos, A.C. 1982b. Active foragers versus sit-and-wait predators: a simple model. Journal of Theoretical Biology 95:381-385.
Leclerc, J. 1991. Optimal foraging strategy of the sheet-web spider Lepthyphantes flavipes under perturbation. Ecology 72:1267-1272.
Lubin, Y., S. Ellner & M. Kotzman. 1993. Web relocation and habitat selection in a desert widow spider. Ecology 74:1915-1928.
McNett, B.J. & A.L. Rypstra. 1997. Effects of prey supplementation on survival and web site tenacity of Argiope trifasciata (Araneae, Araneidae): a field experiment. Journal of Arachnology 25: 352-360.
Miyashita, T. 2005. Contrasting patch residence strategy in two species of sit-and-wait foragers under the same environment: a constraint by life history? Ethology 111:159-167.
Nakata, K. & A. Ushimaru. 1999. Feeding experience affects web relocation and investment in web threads in an orb-web spider, Cyclosa argenteoalba. Animal Behaviour 57:1251-1255.
Nakata, K. & A. Ushimaru. 2004. Difference in web construction behavior at newl