Cupiennius salei
| Cupiennius salei | |
|---|---|
| |
| Second instar of C. salei (scale bar= 500 μm) | |
| Scientific classification | |
| Kingdom: | |
| Phylum: | |
| Class: | |
| Order: | |
| Suborder: | |
| Family: | |
| Genus: | |
| Species: | C. salei
|
| Binomial name | |
| Cupiennius salei | |
Cupiennius salei, commonly called American wandering spider or tropical wandering spider or hunting spider, is a large venomous spider belonging to a group of wandering spiders found in the tropical rainforest of South and Central America. However, the species was accidentally introduced in Germany in the early 20th century from banana plantations in Central America. In the mid 1950s it was realised that the spider was a good model for biological research because of its large size, inactive behaviour, and easy to breed in laboratory. Starting from 1963 publication on its biological characters, it has become the best studied spider species.[1] Further, the spider is now known to produce a complex neurotoxic venom, of which a peptide called CsTx-1 is most potent for paralysing its preys.[2] Its toxin has also become one of the best studied among those of venomous spiders. As the spider does not produce web for trapping preys, venom is its only strategy for catching preys for food. It is known to prey on all kinds of insects and small vertebrates.
Description
Cupiennius salei is a nocturnal spider, and sit-and-wait predator. They are arboreal in nature, so they live in big trees covered with epiphytes, branches, and moss that constitute rainforest roof. Even though they are not very active, they are much faster than other most arachnids when provoked. As they hunt at night, their vision is useless and they rely on tactile sensation, that is they detect movements or vibrations in their environment. There is distinct sexual dimorphism. Females are relatively larger, measuring up to 3.5 cm of body length and 10 cm of legspan. The dorsal side of the body is chocolate-brown with small, lighter spots on the abdomen and many darker longitudinal stripes, particularly on the carapace. The ventral side is red-orange with thin black vertical stripes under the abdomen. Males measure only up to 2.5 cm long but they have very long and thin legs. Their colours are much lighter. They are distinct with conspicuous palpal bulbs.[3]
Venom
Cupiennius salei produces a neurotoxic venom which is composed of a complex mixture of compounds. The venom contains at least 286 compound and 49 novel proteins.[4] In addition, there are many low molecular compounds, nine neurotoxic acting peptides (CSTX), at least eight neurotoxic and cytolytic acting peptides (collectively called cupiennins), highly active hyaluronidases.[1] The most powerful neurotoxin is a peptide called CsTx-1.[2] In 2002 a new family of peptides called cupiennins (cupiennin 1a, cupiennin 1b, cupiennin 1c, cupiennin 1d) was discovered from the venom. These proteins are all composed of 35 amino acid residues, and have high antimicrobial activities.[5] It was subsequently discovered that the cupiennins are broad-spectrum bioactive compounds having bactericidal, insecticidal and haemolytic activities.[6]
Venom gland
Cupiennius salei produces its venom in a pair of cylindrical pouch-like glands located an the anterior end of the head (prosoma). In adult female, each gland measures 1.8 mm in diameter, and 6.5 mm in length. The gland are connected to a small duct through which the venoms are discharged via its fang-like chelicera. Just before entering the chelicera, the duct enlarges to a muscle-invested ampulla and constricts again. This specific arrangement is believed to be the regulatory system on the amount of venom that is released.[1][7]
Venom optimization
Cupiennius salei belongs to a non-web producing spiders, and therefore, entirely depends on its venom for predation. It is known to prey on a variety of insects including, butterfly, moth, earwig, cockroach, fly, grasshopper, and small vertebrates like frogs and lizards.[8] Its venom glands store only about 10 μl crude venom. Refilling of the glands takes 2-3 days and the lethal efficacy of the venom is very low for several days, requiring 8 to 18 days for full effect.[9] It was found that the amount of venom released differed for each specific prey. For example, for bigger and stronger insects like beetle, the spider uses the entire amount of its venom; while for small ones, it uses only small amount, thus economising its costly venom.[10][11]
References
- ^ a b c Kuhn-Nentwig L, Schaller J, Nentwig W (2004). "Biochemistry, toxicology and ecology of the venom of the spider Cupiennius salei (Ctenidae)". Toxicon. 43 (5): 543–553. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2004.02.009. PMID 15066412.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ a b Kuhn-Nentwig L, Fedorova IM, Lüscher BP, Kopp LS, Trachsel C, Schaller J, Vu XL, Seebeck T, Streitberger K, Nentwig W, Sigel E, Magazanik LG (2012). "A venom-derived neurotoxin, CsTx-1, from the spider Cupiennius salei exhibits cytolytic activities". J Biol Chem. 287 (30): 25640-25649. doi:10.1074/jbc.M112.339051. PMC 3408166. PMID 22613721.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link) - ^ Francesco Tomasinelli. "Cupiennius salei" (PDF). The British Tarantula Society Journal. Retrieved 14 September 2013.
- ^ Trachsel C, Siegemund D, Kämpfer U, Kopp LS, Bühr C, Grossmann J, Lüthi C, Cunningham M, Nentwig W, Kuhn-Nentwig L, Schürch S, Schaller J (2012). "Multicomponent venom of the spider Cupiennius salei: a bioanalytical investigation applying different strategies". FEBS J. 279 (15): 2683–2694. doi:10.1111/j.1742-4658.2012.08650.x. PMID 22672445.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Kuhn-Nentwig L, Muller J, Schaller J, Walz A, Dathe M, Nentwig W (2002). "Cupiennin 1, a new family of highly basic antimicrobial peptides in the venom of the spider Cupiennius salei (Ctenidae)". J Biol Chem. 277 (13): 11208–11216. PMID 11792701.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Kuhn-Nentwig L, Sheynis T, Kolusheva S, Nentwig W, Jelinek R (2013). "N-terminal aromatic residues closely impact the cytolytic activity of cupiennin 1a, a major spider venom peptide". Toxicon. pii: S0041-0101(13)00089-5. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2013.03.003. PMID 23523532.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Boevé JL, Kuhn-Nentwig L, Keller S, Nentwig W (1995). "Quantity and quality of venom released by a spider (Cupiennius salei, Ctenidae)". Toxicon. 33 (10): 1347–1357. doi:10.1016/0041-0101(95)00066-U. PMID 8599185.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Nentwig W (1986). "Non-webbuilding spiders: prey specialists or generalists?". Oecologia. 69 (4): 571–576. doi:10.1007/BF00410365.
- ^ Boevé JL, Kuhn-Nentwig L, Keller S, Nentwig W (1995). "Quantity and quality of venom released by a spider (Cupiennius salei, Ctenidae)". Toxicon. 33 (10): 1347–1357. PMID 8599185.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Wigger E, Kuhn-Nentwig L, Nentwig W (2002). "The venom optimisation hypothesis: a spider injects large venom quantities only into difficult prey types". Toxicon. 40 (6): 749-752. doi:10.1016/S0041-0101(01)00277-X. PMID 12175611.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Morgenstern D, King GF (2013). "The venom optimization hypothesis revisited". Toxicon. 63: 120-128. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2012.11.022. PMID 23266311.