Article - Polish Journal of Ecology

POLISH JOURNAL OF ECOLOGY 

(Pol. J. Ecol.) 

58 4 759–768 2010 

Regular research paper 

Maria OLESZCZUK 1 *, Malwina ULIKOWSKA 2 , Krzysztof KUJAWA 1 

1 

Institute for Agricultural and Forest Environment, Polish Academy of Sciences, Field Station, 

Szkolna 4, 64–000 Turew, Poland, *e-mail: oleszczukm@vp.pl (corresponding author) 

2 

Rąbiń, Gajowa 1/2, 64–010 Krzywiń 

EFFECT OF DISTANCE FROM FOREST EDGE 

ON THE DISTRIBUTION AND DIVERSITY OF SPIDER WEBS 

IN ADJACENT MAIZE FIELD 

ABSTRACT: The study was carried out on 

lowland agricultural lands in western Poland between 

July and August 2007. The influence of the 

proximity of forested areas on the occurrence of 

foliage-dwelling spiders was defined by measuring 

the abundance of spider webs on five transects 

situated at distances of 0, 20, 40, 60 and 80 metres 

from the forest edge. Generally, the greatest diversity 

and the highest total density were observed 

close to the forest edge, but an opposite relation 

was found for orb webs, built by spiders from the 

families Araneidae and Tetragnathidae, whose 

abundance was the lowest in close proximity to 

the forest. At a distance of 80 metres from the forest 

a slight increase in total abundance of webs 

was recorded, no doubt due to the presence of 

weeds, in which were recorded numerous occurrences 

of sheet and irregular webs. On all the transects 

studied, orb webs predominated on maize 

shoots, whereas only three-dimensional sheet and 

irregular webs occurred on weeds. Included in 

this discussion are some of the potential effects of 

the proximity of forest areas on foliage-dwelling 

spider populations in maize fields and on the possibilities 

for spiders limiting this crop’s pests. 

KEY WORDS: abundance of spiders, agricultural 

landscape structure, maize, cultivated 

fields, ecotonal zone 

1. INTRODUCTION 

For the last two decades much attention 

has been paid to the issue of biodiversity. One 

of the reasons for the increased interest in this 

topic is the search for some benefits for humans 

in connection with ecosystem services. 

It is commonly accepted that high species 

diversity contributes to the effectiveness of 

biocenotic regulation in an ecosystem, which 

among other things may serve as a mechanism 

for limiting the numbers of some pest 

species on arable lands. Many studies have 

shown that the general level of biodiversity 

in farmland greatly depends on the structure 

of the landscape, mainly the presence 

of non-farmed elements fulfilling the role of 

substitute habitats for many other species, including 

predators and parasites. Due to the 

presence of these habitats, species diversity 

in arable fields is much higher than on more 

uniform landscapes, where non-farmed habitats 

are very sparse. The mosaic-like structure 

of most farmland provides favourable 

conditions for many species of predatory or 

parasitic species, which can effectively reduce 

the populations of some pest species (Karg 

and Ryszkowski 1996, Karg 1999, 2004, 

Kajak 1990, 1998, Kajak and Oleszczuk 

journal 24b.indb 759 2011-01-14 21:37:24

760 

Maria Oleszczuk et al. 

2004, Thomas et al. 1991, Sunderland 

and Samu 2000, S chmidt et al. 2003, 2004, 

Thies et al. 2005, Flückiger and S chmidt 

2006). In consequence, recent studies on biodiversity 

have dealt with functional aspects, 

taking into account the role of a given species 

in the biocenosis, its trophic relations with 

other species and how these relations depend 

on habitat and landscape structure (Jeanneret 

et al. 2003, Birkhofer et al. 2007, 

Har wood and Obr ycki 2007, Öberg et al. 

2007, 2008, S chmidt et al. 2008, Richardson 

and Hanks 2009). 

One of the group of invertebrates that is 

often regarded as playing an important role 

in controlling the abundance of pest species 

in crop fields are spiders (Nyffeler 1982, 

1999, Rypstra 1995, Marc et al. 1999, Sunderland 

1999, Symondson et al. 2002, 

Maloney et al. 2003). Spiders catch their 

prey in two ways: by means of a web or by 

active hunting. Spider webs are very diverse 

in construction and size. The features of webs 

are strictly related to the taxonomy of spiders 

(Roberts 1995): 

• Linyphiidae build sheet-like webs 

without a retreat and the spider hangs 

beneath the web. The spider inserts 

a scaffolding of threads above the 

sheet 

• Araneidae and Tetragnathidae – spin 

orb webs, mostly almost vertical. 

These have developed as an efficient 

means of capturing flying insects. 

Their structure provides a unique 

combination of large capture area 

with close almost invisibility, making 

detection and avoidance difficult, especially 

at night. 

• Theridiidae – spin a tangled threedimensional 

web. 

The type of web construction is an evolutionarily 

adaptation towards the most effective 

way of catching a given set of insect 

species with given habitat preferences and 

type of flight (Nyffeler 1982, 1999, Sunderland 

et al. 1986, Har wood and Obr y- 

cki 2007, Ludy 2007). In consequence, the 

impact of spiders on a prey species depends 

on spider density and the web types present 

in a given habitat. 

The aim of our study was to determine 

the effect of the proximity of forest areas 

adjacent to fields planted with maize on the 

abundance of spider webs, the composition of 

web construction types and the final effect on 

the diversity of prey species. 

2. STUDY AREA AND METHODS 

The study was carried out near the village 

of Turew, located in the central part of 

the Dezydery Chłapowski Landscape Park 

(80 m a.s.l.), 30 kilometres south of Poznań 

(western Poland). The area is predominantly 

flat agricultural landscape, with gradients 

of less than 5%. The density of small rivers 

and canals amounts to 0.4 km km -2 and small 

bodies of water – 1.3 km -2 . Large, intensively 

farmed crop fields dominate the study area, 

but the landscape of the Park as a whole is 

characterized by a highly diversified structure, 

due to the presence of various nonfarmed 

habitats: woodland, copses, bodies of 

water, wetlands, as well as a mosaic of smallsized 

crop fields. Crop fields and grasslands 

cover about 74% of the Park area, with woodland 

constituting about 15%. Woods are numerous, 

but highly fragmented. In most cases, 

small woods are composed of a mosaic of 

small forest stands dominated by either Pinus 

sylvestris L. or Quercus robur L., sometimes 

with an admixture of Robinia pseudoacacia 

L., Picea abies L., Larix decidua Mill., Alnus 

glutinosa Gaertn., Betula pendula Roth and 

Fraxinus excelsior L. The undergrowth layer 

consists mainly of Padus serotina (Ehrh.) 

Borkh. The unique, mosaic structure of the 

farmland, rich in diverse non-farmed habitats, 

creates a favourable habitat for speciesrich 

communities of different organisms 

(Ryszkowski and Karg 1997). 

In the studied field, apart from maize 

plants, the following weeds were present: 

Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv., Chenopodium 

album L., Elymus (Agropyron) repens 

(L.) Gould, Stellaria media (L.) Vill. and Poa 

annua L. The two first mentioned plant species 

were the most numerous. 

The abundance of spider webs was determined 

twice: the first counting was performed 

from 18 th to 20 th of July and the second 

one – from 6 th to 9 th of August. The webs were 

counted on five transects of a maize field that 

were parallel to each other and to the edge of 

a forest adjacent to this field. The tree stand at 

journal 24b.indb 760 2011-01-14 21:37:24

Effect of forest on crop field spider community 761 

Fig. 1. Scheme of sampling plots distribution. 

Fig. 2. Scheme of sampling plot. Grey color indicates the area where webs were counted. 

the edge of this forest consisted of ca 60-year 

old Robinia pseudoacacia with common elder 

and young robinia in the undergrowth layer. 

The distance between each of the transects 

amounted to 20 metres. Each transect consisted 

of 10 three metre long sampling plots 

(sections) distributed evenly, every 10 meters. 

The first transect was located in the row of 

maize planted right at the forest edge and the 

others were located at distances of 20, 40, 60 

and 80 metres from the forest (Fig. 1). 

Each sampling plot consisted of a single 

row of maize (with stems and foliage up to 1.5 

metres in height) as well as a 0.7 metre wide 

strip of ground (with thinly growing weeds) 

between the two neighbouring rows of maize 

(Fig. 2). 

Spider webs were counted after spraying 

with water the whole of a sampling plot. This 

measure made webs visible even when they 

were of a very small size. The type of construction 

and location of the webs were used 

as features enabling their classification to one 

of the four spider families: Linyphiidae (sheet 

webs), Theridiidae (irregular webs) or Araneidae 

and Tetragnathidae (orb webs) (Roberts 

1995). 

3. RESULTS 

The abundance of spider webs was negatively 

correlated with distance from the forest 

(Fig. 3). The gamma correlation coefficient 

amounted to −0.67 (P< 0.001), but this 

journal 24b.indb 761 2011-01-14 21:37:24

762 


Fig. 3. Total density of spider webs (arithmetical means and SD) in relation to distance from the forest 

(see Fig.1). Solid line illustrates relationship between distance (x) and density (y): y=8.87−1.09log(x) 

Table 1. Statistical significance of differences in total spider webs density between studied distances 

from the forest ( see Fig.1). 

Distance 20 40 60 80 

0 ns ** *** ** 

20 ns ** ns 

40 ns ns 

60 ns 

**–P


4. DISCUSSION 

4.1. Web abundance and the contribution 

of particular spider families 

The diversity and abundance of web-spinning 

spiders occurring in crop fields depends 

considerably on the type of crop, and thus on 

the structure (construction) of the cultivated 

plant species and the accompanying weeds. 

Web abundance in the maize field in our study 

(taking into account only those transects separated 

by a distance of over 20 metres from 

the forest in order to eliminate the influence 

of the surrounding environment) amounted 

to 5 webs per m 2 . Assuming that web abundance 

is closely related to total abundance of 

web-spinning spiders, the figures recorded 

are similar to those obtained in the study carried 

out in Germany, where spider abundance 

in the maize field studied amounted to 5.9 

ind. m -2 and the majority of these were webspinning 

spiders (Ludy and L ang 2004). 

Nyffeler and Benz (1979) found a markedly 

lower abundance of foliage-dwelling spiders 

in similar crop: 0.1 ind. m -2 . In a soybean 

field over a similar period as that of the present 

study, i.e. in the middle of the vegetative 

season, spider web abundance amounted to 2 

webs per m 2 (Balfour and Rypstra 1998). 

In the same area where our study was conducted, 

foliage-dwelling spider abundance 

was previously studied in arable fields in July 

and August, and it was found that the majority 

of these were web-spinning species. The 

recorded abundance of web-spinning spiders 

ranged between 0.6 and 14.0, in alfalfa – 3.6 

and 3.0, in potato – 0.7 and 14.1 and in rye 

– 0.6 and 1.0 per m 2 (Łuczak 1975). The 

higher spider abundance (with exception of 

potato) observed in the maize crop is probably 

most commonly caused by the lack of 

other cereal crops in the fields in the period 

of the studies (July/August), because this is 

after the harvest time for these plants. Many 

of the spiders usually occurring on cereals 

may move to adjacent fields with crop plants, 

for example maize yet to be harvested, and for 

this reason spider abundance in these crops 

can be relatively high during this period. 

Fig 4. Density of Linyphiidae (A) and Theridiidae (B) spider webs (arithmetical means and 95% confidence 

level) in relation to distance from the forest (see Fig.1). 

Fig. 5. Relationship between web density (per m 2 ) of spiders from families Linyphiidae and Theridiidae. 

journal 24b.indb 763 2011-01-14 21:37:24

764 


Fig 6. Combined density of Araneidae and Tetragnathidae spider webs (arithmetical means and 95% 

confidence level) in relation to distance from the forest (see Fig.1). 

Fig. 7. Density of spider’s web in relation to distance from forest (Fig.1) and place of their building. 

Orb webs, characteristic for Araneidae 

and Tetragnathidae, prevailed among the spider 

webs recorded in our study. Among the 

various types of webs recorded in maize fields 

in Switzerland (Nyffeler 1982) and the USA 

(Uetz et al. 1999), the highest contribution 

was also that of orb weaving spiders. Similar 

results were obtained in research carried out 

in a maize crop in an area located close to 

Turew village in an earlier period, when again 

spiders from the Araneidae and Tetragnathidae 

families were the most abundant. Three 

dominant foliage-dwelling species were recorded: 

Mangora acalypha Walck., Aculepeira 

ceropegia Walck. and Araniella cucurbitina 

Cl. The first two species mentioned are photophilous 

spiders (Nentwig et al. 2003), preferring 

areas with low plant cover and usually 

occurring in meadows but also in cultivated 

fields (Barthel and Platcher 1995, 1996; 

Wolak 2002, 2004, Ludy and L ang 2004, 

2006). Łuczak (1975) observed that in the 

fields located in the mosaic of habitats around 

the village of Turew, the species M. acalypha 

was 2.4 times more numerous than in 

landscape lacking of shelterbelts and forests. 

Thus, it seems that the presence in the agricultural 

landscape of semi natural habitats, 

such as belts of trees or shrubs, favours a high 

number of some orb web spider species. 

The significance of the type of vegetation 

adjoining crop fields has been confirmed by 

research carried out in Germany (Bavaria). In 

maize fields surrounded by margins covered 

in nettles, the species from the families spinning 

space webs (Theridiidae and Linyphiidae) 

predominated among the spiders spinning 

webs on plants. The spiders represented 

in lesser numbers were those catching their 

prey in orb webs – Tetragnathidae and Araneidae. 

However, the contribution of the 

family Araneidae was considerably higher on 

field margins (almost 20%, compared to 10% 

in maize fields), this being, in the authors’ 

opinion, connected with the dense vegetation 

cover (Ludy and L ang 2004). In Hungary’s 

maize crops on the other hand, the predominant 

species among foliage-dwelling spiders 

was Phylloneta impressa L. K. – one of the 

most common species in Europe, spinning 

journal 24b.indb 764 2011-01-14 21:37:24


irregular, three-dimensional webs. This is 

a photophilous species, which in Poland can 

be found in cereal fields, their abundance being 

higher on plants with greater branching 

of shoots, such as potatoes. The above mentioned 

studies as well as our own results reveal 

that maize fields are inhabited by fairly variable 

assemblages of spider species, in which 

different families may dominate, leading 

to different web types predominating from 

one site to another. The results of the present 

study also suggest that the type of vegetation 

covering the margins of these fields has 

an important influence on the composition of 

the spider species occurring. 

It is worth adding that although this study 

was conducted over just a short period of 

time, the results concerning the contribution 

of particular families can be treated as representative, 

because the peak figures for the 

spider families discussed occur in the same 

periods (Ludy and L ang 2004). 

4.2. The influence of distance from 

a forest on spider webs distribution 

The present study demonstrates a distinct 

connection between spider web types and 

abundance in maize fields and the proximity 

of forest. As the distance from the forest 

increased, total web abundance decreased, 

and among the three spider families studied, 

only spiders building orb webs demonstrated 

an opposite tendency, i.e. abundance of webs 

was the lowest right next to the forest edge 

(an average of less than one web per m 2 ), but 

already from a distance of 20 metres it was as 

high as at any greater distance. This is probably 

caused by the preference of that family’s 

species to well insulated biotopes. The only 

exception is Araniella cucurbitina, which is 

commonly observed in forests, so it is quite 

likely to occur in the ecotonal zone between 

forest and crop field. The webs distribution 

pattern in the Linyphiidae and Theridiidae 

families confirms the thesis that spiders 

do not spin webs on random sites, preferring 

areas where the abundance and diversity 

of potential prey species is high (Har wood 

and Obr ycki 2007). Ecotonal zones abound 

in diverse species of those insects that constitute 

the staple diet of spiders (Karg and 

Ryszkowski 1996, Karg 2004), and this 

partially explains the highest web abundance 

at the border of maize fields adjoining a forest 

and the reduced abundance inside the field, 

where insect numbers are generally lower 

(Karg 2007). 

The data collected on the transect situated 

at a distance of 80 meters from the forest 

indicate that local differentiation of vegetation 

cover also has an important influence on 

web abundance. On this transect, web abundance 

was higher than expected according to 

the observed relationship between total web 

abundance and distance from the forest. This 

inconsistency is due to the slightly higher 

than expected abundance of the sheet webs 

of Linyphiidae, this pattern being illustrated 

by the curve in Fig. 3. This can be explained 

by the occurrence of numerous weeds on 

some of the sections of this transect, covering 

a considerable part of the area and thus making 

suitable conditions for sheet webs. This 

observation also indicates a mechanism by 

which web abundance increases nearer forest. 

A belt several metres in width adjoining 

the forest is usually characterized by a greater 

amount of weeds, as was indeed observed in 

the study area. As a result, most of the sheet 

webs of linyphiid spiders were found just adjacent 

to the forest. So, for the species from 

this family (or at least some of them), proximity 

of a forest or the presence of the habitat 

itself is probably not as important as the fact 

that in the belt of the field adjoining the forest 

the abundance of weeds is usually higher than 

at any greater distance from the forest. It can 

therefore be concluded that for spider species 

from this family observed in the maize field, 

the limiting factor is a shortage of weeds as 

elements of suitable scaffolding. 

However, among the spider species 

studied, one group can be distinguished, 

for which distance from the forest is probably 

a key factor. These are species building 

their webs next to the ground – in hollows or 

near the surface. These are tiny spiders from 

the subfamily Erigonine (Linyphiidae). The 

abundance of these webs was the highest next 

to the forest, whereas in the transect located 

the farthest from the forest – despite the large 

numbers of weeds growing – web abundance 

was not different from that at a distances of 

60 or 40 metres from the forest. 

journal 24b.indb 765 2011-01-14 21:37:25

766 


4.3. The influence of forest proximity 

on the potential impact of spiders on 

insect abundance in cultivated fields 

Among foliage-dwelling spiders, each 

family and in some cases particular species 

build characteristic types of web. Moreover, 

even within the same family, webs may differ 

in vertical distribution. Particular web types 

are adapted to catch defined types of prey, for 

example orb webs mainly filter from the air 

flying insects such as Diptera and Homoptera 

(Nyffeler 1999, Ludy 2007). These two orders 

of insect include among others important 

maize pest species (Oscinella frit L., Elachiptera 

cornuta Fall., Delia platura Mig. and 

Aphidae), which can be successfully eliminated 

by being caught in orb webs and falling 

prey to spiders. Some spider species hunt 

much more diverse prey in terms of both their 

taxonomical and ecological features. For instance, 

the spider species Phylloneta impressa 

(Theridiidae) catches Aphidae and Diptera in 

its webs (Nyffeler 1982, Pekár 2000), but 

at the same time these webs also catch insects 

that jump and run among plants (Nyffeler 

1982). Insects from the Heteroptera order are 

often found in the irregular webs of theridiid 

spiders too (Árpás et al. 2005). So it may be 

assumed that more taxonomically diverse the 

spider commmunity caused the greater web 

diversity and this increases the possibilities 

for spiders contributing to the effective control 

of insect pest numbers. Since the diversity 

and abundance of webs are the highest 

just adjacent to a forest adjoining a field, the 

influence of the presence of forest on the potential 

reduction of insect numbers by spiders 

may be considerable. 

5. CONCLUSIONS 

1. Proximity of a forest positively affects 

spider web abundance and diversity 

in an adjoining crop field, which offers 

possibilities for natural control 

of pest numbers by foliage-dwelling 

spiders. 

2. The highest predation potential of 

spiders is localized in the crop fieldforest 

ecotonal zone due to the high 

abundance of webs and their diversity. 

3. The presence of weeds in a crop favours 

a high abundance of three-dimensional 

spider webs. 

4. The predominance of orb web numbers 

on maize shoots favours the 

capture of this crop’s pests, because 

a considerable proportion of these 

are precisely the tiny insects filtered 

by this type of web. 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: We acknowledge 

the help of Richard Bialy who corrected our 

English. 

6. REFERENCES 

Árpás K., Tóth F., Kiss J. 2005 – Foliagedwelling 

arthropods in Bt-transgenic and isogenic 

maize: a comparison through spider web 

analysis – Acta Phytopathol. Entomol. Hung. 

40: 347–353. 

Balfour R.A., Rypstra A.L. 1998 – The influence 

of habitat structure on spider density 

in a no-till soybean agroecosystem – J. Arachnol. 

26: 221–226. 

Barthel J., Platcher H. 1995 – Distribution of 

foliage-dwelling spiders in uncultivated areas 

of agricultural landscapes (Southern Bavaria, 

Germany) (Arachnida, Araneae) (In: Proc. 

15 th Europ. Coll. Arachnol., Ed: V. Ružička) 

– Institute of Entomology, Česke Budejowice, 

pp: 11–21. 

Barthel J., Platcher H. 1996 – Significance 

of field margins for foliage-dwelling spiders 

(Arachnida, Araneae) in an agricultural landscape 

of Germany – Revue Suisse de Zoologie. 

Hors série 2: 45–59. 

Birkhofer K., Scheu S., Wise D. 2007 – 

Small-scale spatial pattern of web-building 

spiders (Araneae) in alfalfa: relationship to 

disturbance from cutting, prey availability and 

intraguild interactions – Environ. Entomol. 

36: 801–810. 

Flückiger R., Schmidt M.H. 2006 – Contribution 

of sown wildflower areas to cereal 

aphid control: from local to landscape scale – 

IOBC/WPRS Bulletin 29: 41–44. 

Har wood J.D., Obr ycki J.J. 2007 – Web-site 

selection strategies of linyphiid spiders in alfalfa: 

implications for biological control – Bio- 

Control, 52: 451–469. 

Jeanneret Ph., Schüpbach B., Luka H. 

2003 – Quantifying the impact of landscape 

journal 24b.indb 766 2011-01-14 21:37:25


and habitat features on biodiversity in cultivated 

landscapes – Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 

98: 311–320. 

Kajak A. 1990 – Spatial pattern of the intensity 

of area searching by predators – Acta Zool. 

Fenn. 190: 199 – 204. 

Kajak A. 1998 – Nieleśne wyspy środowiskowe 

a bezkręgowce pól uprawnych [Non-forest 

habitat islands and invertebrates of crop fields] 

(In: Ekologia wysp leśnych [Ecology of Forest 

Islands ] Ed: J. Banaszak) – Bydgoszcz University 

Press, Bydgoszcz, 267–278 ( in Polish with 

English summary). 

Kajak A., Oleszczuk M. 2004 – Effect of 

Shelterbelts on adjoining cultivated Fields: 

patrolling intensity of carabid beetles (Carabidae) 

and spiders (Araneae) – Pol. J. Ecol. 52 : 

155–172. 

Karg J. 1999 – Rola zadrzewień śródpolnych 

w podnoszeniu bogactwa zespołów owadów 

w krajobrazie rolniczym [The role of midfield 

shelterbelts in the increasing of insect communities 

diversity in agricultural landscapes] (In: 

Ochrona owadów w Polsce u progu integracji 

z Unią Europejską [Conservation of insects 

in Poland at the threshold of integration into 

the European Union], Scientific Conference, 

23–24 September 1999, Kraków, pp: 27. 

Karg J. 2004 – Importance of midfield shelterbelts 

for over-wintering entomofauna (Turew 

area, West Poland) – Pol. J. Ecol. 52: 421–431. 

Karg J. 2007 – Urozmaicony krajobraz rolniczy 

okolic Turwi: ekologiczne podstawy funkcjonowania 

i zasady kształtowania [Mosaic agricultural 

landscape of the vicinity of Turew: 

ecological basis of landscape functioning and 

principles of landscape management] (In: 

Ochrona Środowiska Rolniczego w świetle 

programów rolno-środowiskowych Unii Europejskiej 

[Protection of agricultural environment 

in the view of agri-environmental 

measures] Eds: S. Bałazy, S. Gmiąt) – Brzesko 

– Poznań – Turew, pp: 40–73. 

Karg J., Ryszkowski J. 1996 – Wpływ struktury 

krajobrazu rolniczego na bioróżnorodność 

i procesy regulacji biocenotycznej [Influence 

of agricultural landscape structure on biodiversity 

and biocenotic regulation processes] 

(In: Ekologiczne procesy na obszarach intensywnego 

rolnictwa [Ecological processes on 

the intensive agriculture areas] Eds: L. Ryszkowski, 

S. Bałazy) – ZBSR i L PAN, Poznań, 

pp: 21–31 (in Polish). 

Ludy C. 2007 – Prey selection of orb-web spiders 

(Araneidae) on field margins – Agric. 

Ecosyst. Environ. 119: 368–372. 

Ludy C., Lang A. 2004 – How to catch foliagedwelling 

spiders (Araneae) in maize fields and 

their margins: a comparison of two sampling 

methods – J. Appl. Entomol. 128: 501–509. 

Ludy C., Lang A. 2006 – A 3-year field-scale 

monitoring of foliage-dwelling spiders (Araneae) 

in transgenic Bt maize fields and adjacent 

field margins – Biol. Control, 38: 314–324. 

Łuczak J. 1975 – Spider communities of the 

crop-fields – Pol. Ecol. Stud. 1: 93–110. 

Maloney D., Drummond F. A., Alford R. 

2003 – Spider Predation in Agroecosystems: 

Can Spiders effectively Control Pest Populations? 

– The University of Main, MAFES 

Technical Bulletin 190, 32 pp. 

Marc P., Canard A., Ysnel F. 1999 – Spiders 

(Araneae) useful for pest limitation and 

bioindication – Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 74: 

229–273. 

Nentwig W., Hanggi A., Kropf Ch., Blick 

T. 2003 – Central European spiders -determination 

key. Version 8.12.2003 – http://www. 

araneae.unibe.ch 

Nyffeler M. 1982 – Field studies on the ecological 

role of the spiders as insects predators in 

agroecosystems (abandoned grassland, meadows 

and cereal fields) – Ph.D thesis, Swiss Federal 

Institute of Technology, Zurich, 174 pp. 

Nyffeler M. 1999 – Prey selection of spiders in 

the field – J. Arachnol. 27: 317–324. 

Nyffeler M., Benz G. 1979 – Zur ökologischen 

Bedeutung der Spinnen der Vegetationsschicht 

von Getreide und Rapsfeldern bei 

Zürich (Schweiz) [Studies on the ecological 

importance of spider populations for the vegetation 

of cereal and rape fields] – Z. Angew. 

Entomol. 87: 348–376. 

Öberg S., Ekbom B., Bommarco R. 2007 

– Influence of habitat type and surrounding 

landscape on spider diversity in Swedish agroecosystems 

– Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 122: 

211–219. 

Öberg S., Mayr S., Dauber J. 2008 – Landscape 

effect on recolonization patterns of spiders 

in arable fields – Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 

123: 211–218. 

Pekár S. 2000 – Webs, diet, and fecundity of 

Theridion impressum (Araneae: Theridiidae) – 

Eur. J. Entomol. 97: 47–50. 

journal 24b.indb 767 2011-01-14 21:37:25

768 


Richardson M.L., Hanks L. 2009 – Partitioning 

of niches among four orb-weaving spiders 

in grassland habitat – Environ. Entomol. 

38: 651–656. 

Roberts M.J. 1995 – Spiders of Britain and 

Northern Europe – Collins Field Guide. Harper 

Collins Publishers, 383 pp. 

Rypstra A.L. 1995 – Spider predators reduce 

herbivory; both by direct consumption and by 

altering the foraging behavior of insect pests – 

Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am. 76: 383. 

Ryszkowski L., Karg J. 1997 – The influence 

of agricultural landscape diversity on biological 

diversity (In: Multifunctional land use, 

Eds:. Ü. Mander, H. Wiggiering, K. Helming) 

– Springer Berlin Heidelberg New York: pp: 

125–141. 

Schmidt M.H., Lauer A., Purtauf T., 

Thies C., Schaefer M., Tscharntke T. 

2003 – Relative importance of predators and 

parasitoids for cereal aphid control – Proc. R. 

Soc. B 270: 1905–1909. 

Schmidt M.H., Thies C., Tscharntke T. 

2004 – The landscape context of arthropod 

biological control (In: Ecological Engineering 

for Pest Management: Advances in Habitat 

Manipulation for Arthropods, Eds: G.M. Gurr, 

S.D. Wratten, M.A. Altieri) – CSIRO, Collingwood 

VIC, pp. 55–63. 

Schmidt M.H., Thies C., Nentwig W., 

Tscharntke T. 2008 – Contrasting responses 

of arable spiders to the landscape matrix at 

different spatial scales – J. Biogeogr. 35: 157– 

166. 

Sunderland K.D. 1999 – Mechanisms underlying 

the effects of spiders on pest populations 

– J. Arachnol. 27: 308–316. 

Sunderland K.D., Fraser A.M., Dixon 

A.F.G. 1986 – Distribution of linyphiid spiders 

in relation to capture of prey in cereal 

fields – Pedobiologia, 29: 367–375. 

Sunderland K.D., Samu F. 2000 – Effects 

of agricultural diversification on the abundance, 

distribution, and pest control potential 

of spiders: a review – Entomol. Exp. Appl. 95: 

1–13. 

Symondson W.O.C., Sunderland K.D., 

Greenstone M.H. 2002 – Can generalist 

predators be effective biocontrol agents? – 

Annu. Rev. Entomol. 47: 561–594. 

Thies C., Roschewitz I., Tscharntke T. 

2005 – The landscape context of cereal aphidparasitoid 

interactions – Proc. R. Soc. B, 272: 

203–210. 

Thomas M., Wratten S., Sotherton N. 

1991 – Creation of „island” habitats in farmland 

to manipulate populations of beneficial 

arthropods: predator densities and emigration 

– J. Appl. Ecol. 28, 906–917. 

Uetz G.W., Halaj J., Cady A.B. 1999 – 

Guild structure of spiders in major crops – J. 

Arachnol. 27: 270–280. 

Wolak M. 2002 – The spider fauna of balks 

(In: European Arachnology 2000, Proc. 

19 th Europ. Coll. Arachnol., Eds: S. Toft, N. 

Scharff) – Århus University Press, Århus, pp. 

229–326. 

Wolak M. 2004 – The significance of unmanaged 

“island” habitats for epigeic spiders in 

a uniform agricultural landscape (In: European 

Arachnology 2002, Proc. 20 th Europ. Coll. 

Arachnol., Eds: F. Samu, Cs. Szinetar) – Plant 

Protection Institute and Berzsenyi College, 

Budapest, pp: 327–336. 

Received after revision February 2010 

journal 24b.indb 768 2011-01-14 21:37:25

Article - Polish Journal of Ecology

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?