Discrimination of flying mimetic, passion–vine butterflies<i>Heliconius</i>

Srygley, Robert B.; Ellington, C. P.

doi:10.1098/rspb.1999.0899

Cited by 39 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mimicry complexes may also fail to converge because the established patterns are so distinct that predators would be very unlikely to confuse them (Turner 1983, p. 279), or the mutations required for switching between patterns are too large/numerous and therefore extremely rare (Turner 1976, p. 196;Sheppard et al 1985, p. 579). Finally, differences in size between mimicry complexes could help keep complexes from converging because size itself may play a role in predator discrimination, and size is correlated with morphological and kinematic traits shown to converge among mimetic butterflies (Hill unpublished;Srygley 1999;Srygley and Ellington 1999). Overall, it appears that mimetic diversity is maintained because establishment of new color patterns, and persistence and immigration of others, is balanced against selection for mimetic resemblance, only some of which is associated with habitat.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Habitat segregation among mimetic ithomiine butterflies (Nymphalidae)

Hill

2009

Evol Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The extensive wing pattern diversity observed among sympatric unpalatable mimetic butterflies is difficult to explain. Diversity is a paradox because selection by predators is expected to drive local species to use the same aposematic patterns. Habitat segregation among mimicry complexes has been suggested as a hypothesis to explain how diversity could be maintained. However, very few studies have tested this hypothesis. To test whether mimicry complexes are associated with particular habitats, I sampled a diverse assemblage of ithomiine butterflies from eastern Ecuador comprising nine discrete mimicry complexes. Butterflies were sampled in four habitats varying along a gradient of succession. A total of 43 species and 902 individuals were sampled. Ithomiine species richness and abundance were lowest in open habitats, and habitat preferences were documented for many species. Mimicry complexes exhibited significant habitat differences supporting the role of habitat segregation in maintaining mimetic diversity. However, there was obvious overlap among mimicry complexes, particularly involving the two numerically dominant patterns at the site. The pattern of segregation appears to be driven by common species, with relatively little evidence that the distribution of rarer species matches that of the more abundant species. Thus, habitat segregation is likely to play a role in the evolution of mimetic diversity as a result of segregated abundant model species, but the effect is probably weak and other factors are also important.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Habitat segregation among mimetic ithomiine butterflies (Nymphalidae)

Hill

2009

Evol Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Heliconius is an extraordinarily diverse genus of long‐lived, toxic butterflies distributed from northern Argentina to southern United States (Brown 1981). They exhibit intra and interspecific color pattern diversity that together with habitat preferences and flight characteristics, often converge among species within the genus to form remarkable examples of mimicry (e.g., Brown 1981; Mallet and Gilbert 1995; Srygley and Ellington 1999; Estrada and Jiggins 2002). Antiaphrodisiac compounds are produced in glands located inside two chitinized claspers in the last abdominal segment in males (Eltringham 1925; Gilbert 1976; Schulz et al 2008).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sexual Selection Drives the Evolution of Antiaphrodisiac Pheromones in Butterflies

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Competition for mates has resulted in sophisticated mechanisms of male control over female reproduction. Antiaphrodisiacs are pheromones transferred from males to females during mating that reduce attractiveness of females to subsequent courting males.Antiaphrodisiacs generally help unreceptive females reduce male harassment. However, lack of control over pheromone release by females and male control over the amount transferred provides males an opportunity to use antiaphrodisiacs to delay remating by females that have returned to a receptive state. We propose a model for the evolution of antiaphrodisiacs under the influence of intrasexual selection, and determine whether changes in this signal in 11 species of Heliconius butterflies are consistent with two predictions of the model. First, we find that as predicted, male-contributed chemical mixtures are complex and highly variable across species, with limited phylogenetic signal. Second, differences in rates of evolution in pheromone composition between two major clades of Heliconius are as expected: the clade with a greater potential for male-male competition (polyandrous) shows a faster rate of divergence than the one with typically monoandrous mating system. Taken together, our results provide evidence that for females, antiaphrodisiacs can be both honest signals of receptivity (helping reduce harassment) and chastity belts (a male-imposed reduction in remating). K E Y W O R D S :Female mating receptivity, Heliconius, male-male competition, male control on female reproduction, sexual conflict, signal evolution.Male control over female mating frequency is common in nature and involves remarkable morphological, behavioral, and physiological adaptations aimed at manipulating female receptivity or discouraging advances by other males (e.g., Parker 1970, Simmons 2001. Common mechanisms include the transfer of seminal fluid proteins, donation of nuptial gifts, formation of mating plugs, and mate guarding (Thornhill and Alcock 1983;Simmons 2001). The evolution of such strategies is the result of selection on males to reduce sperm competition when females mate repeatedly within a breeding period. Females often obtain direct

show abstract

“…If predators recognize the combination of traits as a mimetic signal, then they may select against the evolution of a single trait away from the local adaptive phenotype more strongly than concordant changes in all of the traits. Hence, wing coloration, wing-beat frequency and asymmetries in the wing motion (Srygley & Ellington 1999) may all have to change in concordance. If a higher wing-beat frequency is necessary to balance the body weight given the smaller wing length of the m^e co-mimics (Srygley 1999), then body mass may also have to change in concordance with the other traits.…”

Section: Discussion (A) Aerodynamic Power Requirements and Mimicrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, Srygley (1999) and Srygley & Ellington (1999) demonstrated that mimetic Heliconius butter£ies have similar £ight behaviours. Heliconius cydno and Heliconius sapho had lower wing-beat frequencies and a more asymmetrical wing motion due to a prolonged downstroke and shortened upstroke, whereas Heliconius melpomene and Heliconius erato had higher wing-beat frequencies and a nearsinusoidal wing motion with a more even downstroke and upstroke.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Estimating the relative fitness of local adaptive peaks: the aerodynamic costs of flight in mimetic passion–vine butterfliesHeliconius

Srygley

Ellington

1999

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a related paper, we demonstrated that mimetic Heliconius butter£ies have converged in wing-beat frequency and degree of asymmetry in the wing motion, whereas sister species are dissimilar in these same traits. Warning signals of sympatric, distasteful species converge in evolutionary models in order to educate their predators more e¤ciently that the signal is associated with unpro¢table prey. Barring other constraints, the behaviours of the di¡erent co-mimetic pairs should ultimately converge on that behaviour which minimizes the energetic cost of £ight. We estimated the energetic cost of each mimic's £ight behaviour in order to predict the di¡erence in height of each ¢tness peak and the direction of convergent selection qualitatively. Following adjustments for body mass, mimetic Heliconius melpomene and Heliconius erato required more aerodynamic power than Heliconius cydno and Heliconius sapho. This di¡erence was attributed to the slower £ight speeds and higher wing-beat frequencies of H. melpomene and H. erato. Consequently, H. melpomene and H. erato expended more energy per unit distance per unit body mass than H. cydno and H. sapho. However, di¡erences in body mass may equalize energy budgets and stabilize the sympatric coexistence of the two pairs of co-mimics.

show abstract

Discrimination of flying mimetic, passion–vine butterfliesHeliconius

Cited by 39 publications

References 20 publications

Habitat segregation among mimetic ithomiine butterflies (Nymphalidae)

Habitat segregation among mimetic ithomiine butterflies (Nymphalidae)

Sexual Selection Drives the Evolution of Antiaphrodisiac Pheromones in Butterflies

Estimating the relative fitness of local adaptive peaks: the aerodynamic costs of flight in mimetic passion–vine butterfliesHeliconius

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About