Skip to main content
Log in

Population differences in predation on Batesian mimics in allopatry with their model: selection against mimics is strongest when they are common

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Batesian mimicry evolves when a palatable species, the “mimic,” resembles a dangerous species, the “model,” because both receive protection from predation. Yet, this protection should break down where the model is absent, because predators in such areas would not be under selection to avoid the model. Here, we test this prediction in a coral snake mimicry complex. We exposed plasticine replicas of milk snakes that closely mimic coral snakes to natural predators to determine if good mimetic milk snakes are preferentially attacked in allopatry with their model. Moreover, we evaluated whether attack rates on these replicas varied among three different allopatric regions that differed in the type of mimic found locally (i.e., good mimic, poor mimic, or no mimic). When all three regions were considered together, mimics were not preferentially attacked. When regions were analyzed separately, however, attacks on mimics were significantly greater than randomness only where good mimics were found. These variable levels of predation on good mimics might reflect frequency-dependent (i.e., apostatic) predation. In allopatric regions where good mimics are present, predators might have learned or evolved preferences for conspicuous, palatable prey that they encounter frequently. By contrast, in allopatric regions where good mimics are absent, predators might not have learned or evolved preferences for novel phenotypes. Thus, when predation is frequency-dependent, as long as good mimics are rare, they might not experience elevated levels of predation in allopatry with their model as predicted by the Batesian mimicry hypothesis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen JA (1988) Frequency-dependent selection by predators. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B 319:485–503

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bates HW (1862) Contributions to an insect fauna of the Amazon valley. Lepidoptera: Heliconidae. Trans Linn Soc Lond 23:495–566

    Google Scholar 

  • Brattstrom BH (1955) The coral snake “mimic” problem and protective coloration. Evolution 9:217–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brodie ED III (1993) Differential avoidance of coral snake banded patterns by free-ranging avian predators in Costa Rica. Evolution 47:227–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brodie ED III, Janzen FJ (1995) Experimental studies of coral snake mimicry: generalized avoidance of ringed snake patterns by free-ranging avian predators. Funct Ecol 9:186–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brodie ED III, Brodie ED Jr (2004) Venomous snake mimicry. In: Campbell JA, Lamar WW (eds) The venomous reptiles of the western hemisphere, vol II. Comstock, Ithaca, NY, pp 617–633

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke C, Sheppard PM (1975) The genetics of the mimetic butterfly Hypolimnas bolina (L). Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B 272:229–265

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Conant R (1943) The milk snakes of the Atlantic coastal plain. Proc New Engl Zool Club 22:3–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Conant R, Collins JT (1998) A field guide to reptiles and amphibians of eastern and central North America, 3rd edn. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Cope ED (1893) The color variation of the milk snake. Am Nat 27:1066–1071

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curio E (1976) The ethology of predation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmunds M (1974) Defense in animals. A survey of anti-predator defenses. Longmans, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Endler JA (1986) Natural selection in the wild. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Endler JA (1988) Frequency-dependent predation, crypsis and aposematic coloration. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B 319:505–523

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Endler JA (1991) Interactions between predators and prey. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology. An evolutionary approach, 3rd edn. Blackwell, London, pp 169–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon IJ, Smith DAS (1998) Body size and colour-pattern genetics in the polymorphic butterfly Hypolimnas misippus (L). Heredity 80:62–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene HW, McDiarmid RY (1981) Coral snake mimicry: does it occur? Science 213:1207–1212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood JJD (1969) Apostatic selection and population density. Heredity 24:157–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinman KE, Throop HL, Adams KL, Dake AJ, McLauchlan KK, McKone MJ (1997) Predation by free-ranging birds on partial coral snake mimics: the importance of ring width and color. Evolution 51:1011–1014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (1965) The functional response of predators to prey density and its role in mimicry and population regulation. Mem Entomol Soc Can 45:1–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (1966) The functional response of invertebrate predators to prey density. Mem Entomol Soc Can 47:3–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamil AC (1989) Studies of learning and memory in natural contexts: intergrating functional and mechanistic approaches to behaviour. In: Blanchard RJ, Brain P, Blanchard DC, Parmigiani S (eds) Ethoexperimental approaches to the study of behavior. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp 30–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch PB, Behnecke B, Ffrench-Constant RH (2000) The molecular basis of melanism and mimicry in a swallowtail butterfly. Curr Biol 10:591–594

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Madsen T (1987) Are juvenile grass snakes, Natrix natrix, aposematically colored? Oikos 48:265–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mallet J (2001) Mimicry: an interface between psychology and Evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:8928–8930

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mallet J, Joron M (1999) Evolution of diversity in warning color and mimicry: polymorphisms, shifting balance, and speciation. Ann Rev Ecolog Syst 30:201–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merilaita S (2006) Frequency-dependent predation and maintenance of prey polymorphism. J Evol Biol (in press). DOI 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2006.01137.x

  • Murdoch WW (1969) Switching in general predators: experiments of predator specificity and stability of prey populations. Ecol Monogr 39:335–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer WM, Braswell AL (1995) Reptiles of North Carolina. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfennig DW, Harcombe WR, Pfennig KS (2001) Frequency-dependent Batesian mimicry. Nature 410:323

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pough FH (1976) Multiple cryptic effects of crossbanded and ringed patterns of snakes. Copeia 1976:335–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prudic KL, Shapiro AM, Clayton NS (2002) Evaluating a putative mimetic relationship between two butterflies, Adelpha bredowii and Limenitis lorquini. Ecol Entomol 27:68–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roze JA (1996) Coral snakes of the Americas: biology, identification, and venoms. Krieger, Malabar, FL

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruxton GD, Sherratt TN, Speed MP (2004) Avoiding attack: the Evolutionary ecology of crypsis, warning signals and mimicry. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith SM (1975) Innate recognition of coral snake pattern by a possible avian predator. Science 187:759–760

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith SM (1977) Coral-snake pattern recognition and stimulus generalisation by naive great kiskadees (Aves: Tyrannidae). Nature 265:535–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson JN (2005) The geographic mosaic of coEvolution. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldbauer GP, Sternburg JG (1987) Experimental field demonstration that two aposematic butterfly color patterns do not confer protection against birds in Northern Michigan. Am Midl Nat 118:145–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace AR (1870) Contributions to the theory of natural selection. Macmillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickler W (1968) Mimicry in plants and animals. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams KL (1978) Systematics and natural history of the American milk snake, Lampropeltis triangulum. Milwaukee Public Museum Publications in Biology and Geology 2:1–258

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank two anonymous referees for helpful comments on our paper. This research was supported by grants from the National Science Foundation to D. Pfennig and K. Pfennig.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David W. Pfennig.

Additional information

Communicated by P. Weatherhead

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pfennig, D.W., Harper, G.R., Brumo, A.F. et al. Population differences in predation on Batesian mimics in allopatry with their model: selection against mimics is strongest when they are common. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61, 505–511 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-006-0278-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-006-0278-x

Keywords

Navigation