Study
Flexibility in the foraging strategies of spiders
Nelson, Ximena J.; Jackson, Robert R.
Spider Behaviour: Flexibility and Versatility (Cambridge University Press), 2011
A review chapter synthesising decades of detour and foraging experiments with Portia jumping spiders. In the underlying studies, spiders were placed where they could see prey but could not reach it directly, with two routes available — one leading to the prey and one not — and had to choose while the prey was out of sight for most of the journey.
- Studied in
- Portia
- Sample size
- jumping spiders tested on detour apparatus
Spiders reliably selected the route that led to the prey, and completed detours during which the target was not visible, sometimes taking substantial time before setting off.
What it means
The authors' reading, and ours. Where they differ, that difference is the point.
How the authors put it
Portia plans a route to a goal it cannot currently see, indicating a representation of the target that persists through the detour.
How NatureHQ reads it
The detour is the whole result: a spider that keeps going towards something it can no longer see is holding onto it somehow. That is a strong claim for an animal this size, and it is worth noting what it does not show — nothing here reveals what the spider represents, only that the behaviour survives loss of sight of the goal. NatureHQ cites this as a synthesis of the detour literature rather than as a primary experimental report; the primary evidence sits in the individual studies it reviews.
- A review chapter rather than a primary report, so it inherits the limitations of the work it summarises.
- Small samples throughout, as is normal in invertebrate cognition work.
- What is retained during the detour is inferred from behaviour, not measured.
- Portia is a specialist predator and may not represent jumping spiders generally.
What this study is used for on NatureHQ
One study can inform several subjects. Here is everywhere this one is cited.
Published by: Academic book publishersPublished as an academic monograph.
doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511974496.003
This reference was resolved automatically against Crossref and OpenAlex on 2026-08-11.
NatureHQ summarises research in its own words and does not reproduce published text. Reviewed 2026-08-09.