
AbstractMost spiders are natural enemies of pests, and it is beneficial for the biological control of pests to learn the relationships between symbionts and their spider hosts. Research on the bacterial communities of insects has been conducted recently, but only a few studies have addressed the bacterial communities of spiders. To obtain a complete overview of the microbial communities of spiders, we examined eight species of spider (Pirata subpiraticus, Agelena difficilis, Artema atlanta, Nurscia albofasciata, Agelena labyrinthica, Ummeliata insecticeps, Dictis striatipes, and Hylyphantes graminicola) with high‐throughput sequencing based on the V3 and V4 regions of the 16S rRNA gene. The bacterial communities of the spider samples were dominated by five types of endosymbionts, Wolbachia, Cardinium, Rickettsia, Spiroplasma, and Rickettsiella. The dominant OTUs (operational taxonomic units) from each of the five endosymbionts were analyzed, and the results showed that different spider species were usually dominated by special OTUs. In addition to endosymbionts, Pseudomonas, Sphingomonas, Acinetobacter, Novosphingobium, Aquabacterium, Methylobacterium, Brevundimonas, Rhizobium, Bradyrhizobium, Citrobacter, Arthrobacter, Pseudonocardia, Microbacterium, Lactobacillus, and Lactococcus were detected in spider samples in our study. Moreover, the abundance of Sphingomonas, Methylobacterium, Brevundimonas, and Rhizobium in the spider D. striatipes was significantly higher (p < .05) than the bacterial abundance of these species in seven other spider species. These findings suggest that same as in insects, co‐infection of multiple types of endosymbionts is common in the hosts of the Araneae order, and other bacterial taxa also exist in spiders besides the endosymbionts.
Original Research
Original Research
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 42 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
