Advertisement

Evolutionary Ecology

, Volume 13, Issue 7–8, pp 691–708 | Cite as

Incorporating Motion into Investigations of mimicry

  • Robert B. Srygley
Article

Abstract

During the past thirty years, natural selection due to predation has been investigated with regard to prey motion in three areas that are relevant to the evolution of mimicry: (1) anti-apostatic selection, (2) locomotor mimicry, and (3) escape mimicry. Anti-apostatic selection, or selection against the odd individuals, arises when prey are at very high densities or when prey are Müllerian mimics. When prey are at high densities, motion of the prey increases selection against odd individuals. When the prey are Müllerian mimics, motion may also play an important role in strengthening selection against odd individuals. This may explain locomotor mimicry between Müllerian mimics. Locomotor mimicry arises when two distantly-related prey species appear alike in behaviour, and there is a corresponding suite of morphological, physiological, and biomechanical traits that the prey have in common. Locomotor mimicry has been demonstrated in Müllerian mimics. It is also predicted to occur in Batesian mimics but with important limitations due to selection by the predator for the prey to maintain the ability to escape if detected. Locomotor mimicry may also occur between palatable species that are alike as a result of unprofitable prey (or escape) mimicry. Escape mimicry arises when prey are difficult to capture. By frustration learning, the predator associates the colour of the prey with unprofitability. In all three instances, dis-similarity in colour or motion probably increases selection against the odd individual. In addition, the interaction of colour and motion gives rise to greater reliability of the signals to a specialist predator. However for a generalist predator, multiple component signals of the prey lead to errors in signal perception and greater risk of cheating.

anti-apostatic selection escape mimicry locomotor mimicry perception predator–prey selection 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ackery, P. and Vane-Wright, R. (1984) Milkweed Butterflies: Their Cladistics and Biology. British Museum (Natural History), Entomology, London.Google Scholar
  2. Aiello, A. (1984) Adelpha (Nymphalidae): deception on the wing. Psyche 91, 1-45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen, J.A. (1988) Frequency-dependent selection by predators. Phil. Trans. Royal Soc. Lond. B 319, 485-503.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, R.R. and Parker, G.A. (1979) The evolution of bird colouration. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 287, 63-130.Google Scholar
  5. Barnard, C.J. (1979) Predation and the evolution of social mimicry in birds. Am. Nat. 113, 6613-6618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bates, H.W. (1862) Contributions to an insect fauna of the Amazon valley. Lepidoptera: Heliconidae. Trans. Linn. Soc. Lond. 23, 495-566.Google Scholar
  7. Bennett, A.T.D. and Cuthill, I.C. (1994) Ultraviolet vision in birds — what is its function. Vision Res. 34, 1471-1478.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Benson, W.W. (1972) Natural selection for Müllerian mimicry in Heliconius erato in Costa Rica. Science 176, 936-939.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Bond, A.B. and Kamil, A.C. (1998) Apostatic selection by blue jays produces balanced polymorphism in virtual prey. Nature 395, 594-596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brodie, E.D. (1992) Correlational selection for colour pattern and antipredator behaviour in the garter snake Thamnophis ordinoides. Evolution 46, 1284-1298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brooke, M.D., Hanley, S. and Laughlin, S.B. (1999) The scaling of eye size with body mass in birds. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 266, 405-412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brower, A.V.Z. (1995) Locomotor mimicry in butterflies? A critical review of the evidence. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 347, 413-425.Google Scholar
  13. Brower, L.P. and Brower, J.V.Z. (1964) Birds, butterflies, and plant poisons: a study in ecological chemistry. Zoologica, N.Y. 49, 137-159.Google Scholar
  14. Brower, L.P., Brower, J.V.Z. and Collins, C.T. (1963) Experimental studies on mimicry. 7. Relative palatability and Müllerian mimicry among neotropical butterflies of the subfamily Heliconiinae. Zoologica, N.Y. 48, 65-84.Google Scholar
  15. Brown, J.F. (1931a) The visual perception of velocity. Psychol. Forsch. 14, 199-232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brown, J.F. (1931b) The thresholds for visual movement. Psychol. Forsch. 14, 249-268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Burger, J. and Gochfield, M. (in press) Smooth-billed anti predation on butterflies in Mato Grosso, Brazil: risk decreased with increased group size Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. Google Scholar
  18. Chai, P. (1986) Field observations and feeding experiments on the responses of rufous-tailed jacamars (Galbula ruficauda) to free-flying butterflies in a tropical rainforest. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 29, 161-189.Google Scholar
  19. Chai, P. (1990) Butterfly traits and bird responses: relationships between visual characteristics of rainforest butterflies and responses of a specialized insectivorous bird. In Wicksten M., (ed.) Adaptive Coloration in Invertebrates: Proceedings of Symposium Sponsored by American Society of Zoologists. Seagrant College Program, Texas A & M University, Galveston, Texas, pp. 31-60.Google Scholar
  20. Chai, P. (1996) Butterfly visual characteristics and ontogeny of responses to butterflies by a specialized tropical bird. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 59, 37-67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chai, P. and Srygley, R.B. (1990) Predation and the flight, morphology, and temperature of Neotropical rainforest butterflies. Am. Nat. 135, 748-765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Curio, E. (1976) The Ethology of Predation. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  23. Dudley, R. (1999) The Biomechanics of Insect Flight. Princeton, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  24. Ehrlich, P. and Ehrlich, A. (1973) Coevolution: heterotypic schooling in Caribbean reef fishes. Am. Nat. 107, 157-160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Endler, J.A. (1978) A predator's view of animal colour patterns. Evol. Biol. 11, 319-364.Google Scholar
  26. Endler, J.A. (1986) Defense against predators. In M.E. Feder and G.V. Lauder (eds.) Predator-Prey Relationships. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 109-134.Google Scholar
  27. Endler, J.A. (1992) Signals, signal conditions, and the direction of evolution. Am. Nat. 139, S125-S153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Endler, J.A. and Théry, M. (1996) Interacting effects of lek placement, display behaviour, ambient light, and colour patterns in three Neotropical forest-dwelling birds. Am. Nat. 148, 421-452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fleishman, L.J. (1988) Sensory influence on physical design of a visual display. Anim. Behav. 36, 1420-1424.Google Scholar
  30. Gibson, D.O. (1974) Batesian mimicry without distastefulness? Nature 250, 77-79.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gibson, D.O. (1980) The role of escape in mimicry and polymorphism: I. The response of captive birds to artificial prey. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 14, 201-214.Google Scholar
  32. Gilbert, L.E. (1983) Coevolution and mimicry. In D.J. Futuyma and M. Slatkin (eds.) Coevolution. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA, pp. 263-281.Google Scholar
  33. Golding, Y.C., Ennos, A.R. and Edmunds, M. (2001) Similarity in flight behaviour between the honeybee Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) and its presumed mimic, the dronefly Eristalis tenax (Diptera: Syrphidae). J. exp. Biol. 204, 139-145.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Greene, E., Orsak, L.J. and Whitman, D.W. (1987) A tephritid fly mimics the territorial displays of its jumping spider predators. Science 236, 311-313.Google Scholar
  35. Guilford, T. and Dawkins, M.S. (1991) Receiver psychology and the evolution of animal signals. Anim. Behav. 42, 1-14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hancox, A.P. and Allen, J.A. (1991) A simulation of evasive mimicry in the wild. J. Zool. London 223, 9-13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jackson, R.R. and Whitehouse, M.E.A. (1986) The biology of New Zealand and Queensland (Australia) pirate spiders (Araneae, Mimetidae): aggressive mimicry, araneophagy and prey specialization. J. Zool. A 210, 279-303.Google Scholar
  38. Jackson, R.R. and Wilcox, R.S. (1993) Spider flexibly chooses aggressive mimicry signals for different prey by trial and error. Behaviour 127, 21-36.Google Scholar
  39. Jackson, J.F., Ingram III, W. and Campbell, H.W. (1976) The dorsal pigmentation of snakes as an anti-predator strategy: a multivariate approach. Am. Nat. 110, 1029-1053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Johnstone, R.A. (1994) Honest signaling, perceptual error and the evolution of all-or-nothing displays. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 256, 169-175.Google Scholar
  41. Johnstone, R.A. and Grafen, A. (1992) Error-prone signaling. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 248, 229-233.Google Scholar
  42. Kettlewell, H.B.D. (1973) The Evolution of Melanism. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  43. Kingsolver, J.G. and Srygley, R.B. (2000) Experimental analyses of body size, flight and survival in pierid butterflies. Evol. Ecol. Res. 2, 593-612.Google Scholar
  44. Landeau, L. and Terborgh, J. (1986) Oddity and the 'confusion effect’ in predation. Anim. Behav. 34, 1372-1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mallet, J. and Barton, N.H. (1989) Strong natural selection in a warning-colour hybrid zone. Evolution 43, 421-431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mallet, J. and Joron, M. (2000) Evolution of diversity in warning colour and mimicry: polymorphisms, shifting balance, and speciation. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 30, 201-234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mallet, J. and Singer, M.C. (1987) Individual selection, kin selection, and the shifting balance in the evolution of warning colours: the evidence from butterflies. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 32, 337-350.Google Scholar
  48. Marden, J.H. and Chai, P. (1991) Aerial predation and butterfly design: how palatability, mimicry, and the need for evasive flight constrain mass allocation. Am. Nat. 137, 15-36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mather, M.H. and Roitberg, B.D. (1987) A sheep in wolf's clothing: tephritid flies mimic spider predators. Science 236, 308-310.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Müller, F. (1879) Ituna and Thyridis; a remarkable case of mimicry in butterflies (translated by R. Mendola). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Lond. 1879, 20-29.Google Scholar
  51. Nahrstedt, A. and Davis, R.H. (1983 Occurrence, variation and biosynthesis of the cyanogenic glucosides linamarin and lotaustralin in species of the Heliconiini (Insecta: Lepidoptera). Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 75B, 65-73.Google Scholar
  52. Neild, A.F.E. (1996) The Butterflies of Venezuela. Meridian, London.Google Scholar
  53. Nickolai, J. (1964) Der Brutparasitismus der Viduinae als ethologisches Problem. Prägugsphänomene als Faktoren der Rassen-und Artbildung. Zietschrift Tierpsychol. 21, 129-204.Google Scholar
  54. Nikolai, J. (1974) Mimicry in parasitic birds. Scientific American 231, 92-98.Google Scholar
  55. Ohguchi, O. (1978) Experiments on the selection against colour oddity of water fleas by three-spined sticklebacks. Zietschrift Tierpsychol 47, 254-267.Google Scholar
  56. Ohguchi, O. (1981) Prey density and selection against oddity by three-spined sticklebacks. Zietschrift Tierpsychol (suppl. 23) Verlag Paul Parey, Berlin.Google Scholar
  57. Persons, M.H., Fleishman, L.J., Frye, M.A. and Stimphil, M.E. (1999) Sensory response patterns and the evolution of visual signal design in anoline lizards. J. Comp. Physiol. A 184, 585-607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pinheiro, C.E.G. (1996) Palatability and the escaping ability in Neotropical butterflies: tests with wild kingbirds (Tyrannus melancholicus, Tyrannidae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 59, 351-365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pough, F.H. (1976) Multiple cryptic effects of crossbanded and ringed patterns of snakes. Copeia 1976, 834-836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rowe, C. (1999) Receiver psychology and the evolution of multicomponent signals. Anim. Behav. 58, 921-931.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rowe, C. and Guilford, T. (1996) Hidden colour aversions in domestic chicks triggered by pyrazine odours of insect warning displays. Nature 383, 520-522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Srygley, R.B. (1994) Locomotor mimicry in butterflies? The associations of positions of centres of mass among groups of mimetic, unprofitable prey. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 343, 145-155.Google Scholar
  63. Srygley, R.B. (1999) Locomotor mimicry in Heliconius butterflies: contrast analyses of flight morphology and kinematics. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 354, 203-214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Srygley, R.B. and Chai, P. (1990) Flight morphology of Neotropical butterflies: palatability and distribution of mass to the thorax and abdomen. Oecologia 84, 491-499.Google Scholar
  65. Srygley, R.B. and Dudley, R. (1993) Correlations of the position of center of body mass with butterfly escape tactics. J. exp. Biol. 174, 155-166.Google Scholar
  66. Srygley, R.B. and Ellington, C.P. (1999a) Discrimination of flying, mimetic passion-vine butterflies Heliconius. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 266, 2137-2140.Google Scholar
  67. Srygley, R.B. and Ellington, C.P. (1999b) Estimating the relative fitness of local adaptive peaks: the aerodynamic costs of flight in mimetic passion-vine butterflies Heliconius. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 266, 2239-2245.Google Scholar
  68. Srygley, R.B. and Kingsolver, J.G. (1998) Red-wing blackbird reproductive behaviour and the palatability, flight performance, and morphology of temperate pierid butterflies (Colias, Pieris, and Pontia). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 64, 41-55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Srygley, R.B. and Kingsolver, J.G. (2000) Effects of weight loading on flight performance and survival of palatable Neotropical Anartia fatima butterflies. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 70, 707-725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Vine, I. (1971) Risk of visual detection and pursuit by a predator and the selective advantage of flocking behaviour. J. Theor. Biol. 30, 405-422.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Welch, R. and Warren, D.H. (1986) Intersensory interactions. In K.R. Boff, L. Kaufman and J.P. Thomas (eds.) Handbook of Perception and Human Performance I. Sensory Processes and Perception, John Wiley, New York, pp. 25-36.Google Scholar
  72. Wickler, W. (1968) Mimicry in Plants and Animals. MacGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  73. Wickler, W. (1963) Zum Problem der Signalbildung, am Beispiel der Verhaltens-Mimikry zwischen Aspidontus und Labroides (Pisces, Acanthopterygii). Zietschrift Tierpsychol. 20, 657-679.Google Scholar
  74. Wilson, S.E., Allen, J.A. and Anderson, K.P. (1990) Fast movement of densely aggregated prey increases the strength of anti-apostatic selection by wild birds. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 41, 375-380.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert B. Srygley
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK (tel.

Personalised recommendations