Mimics without models: causes and consequences of allopatry in Batesian mimicry complexes

Pfennig, David W.; Mullen, Sean P.

doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.0586

Cited by 62 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Both Endler & Rojas (2009) and Sherratt (2006) show that this breakdown in stabilizing selection can facilitate the evolution of novel aposematic phenotypes because of the ‘flat’ adaptive landscape associated with regions of low signal frequency. Therefore, spatial or temporal variation in the local density of aposematic phenotypes may facilitate the evolution of novel signals as a result of coincident fluctuations in adaptive landscapes (Sherratt, 2006; Endler & Rojas, 2009); however, this process lacks empirical support (however, see Pfennig & Mullen, 2010 for an example related to Batesian mimicry).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial variation in the fitness of divergent aposematic phenotypes of the poison frog, Dendrobates tinctorius

Comeault

Noonan

2011

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aposematic species use brightly coloured signals to warn potential predators of their unpalatability. The function of these signals is largely believed to be frequency‐dependent. All else being equal, stabilizing selection is expected to constrain the evolution of novel signals. However, despite the expected frequency‐dependant function of aposematic signals, interpopulation variation in aposematic signals is ubiquitous in nature. Here, we used clay models of the poison frog Dendrobates tinctorius to test the nature of selection in regions containing varying frequencies of frogs possessing the local aposematic signal. Our findings support a role for stabilizing selection in maintaining the local signal type in a region of high signal frequency; however, we observe a lack of stabilizing selection at one site coincident with a decrease in the density of frogs possessing the local signal. Spatial variation in local aposematic signal frequencies may facilitate the evolution of novel signal types by altering the adaptive landscape for divergent aposematic phenotypes. Our results provide evidence for spatial variation in the selective regime acting on aposematic signals within an established aposematic system and highlight the need for further study of the nature of selection acting across different spatial scales in diverse aposematic systems.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial variation in the fitness of divergent aposematic phenotypes of the poison frog, Dendrobates tinctorius

Comeault

Noonan

2011

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regardless of why mimicry fails to break down in allopatry, these findings have important implications for Batesian mimicry's role in local adaptation and, potentially, speciation (Pfennig & Mullen, ; Pfennig et al ., ; Davis Rabosky et al ., ). Generally, populations of mimics that occur in sympatry with their model vs. those in allopatry are expected to experience contrasting selective pressures (Pfennig et al ., ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, the precision of mimics has been shown to decrease in locations where their model is absent; that is, in allopatry (Harper & Pfennig, ; Ries & Mullen, ). Although long‐standing theory predicts that mimics should only occur in regions inhabited by their model (Wallace, ; Ruxton et al ., ), many species of mimics violate this prediction and also occupy regions where their model is absent (Pfennig & Mullen, ). Although mimics might benefit from being conspicuous in the absence of models if, for instance, predators innately avoid such signals, mimics that occur in such locations are generally expected to experience selection against mimetic phenotypes because such phenotypes are typically aposematic and thus conspicuous to potential predators (Ruxton et al ., ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geographic variation in mimetic precision among different species of coral snake mimics

Akcali

Pfennig

2017

J of Evolutionary Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Batesian mimicry is widespread, but whether and why different species of mimics vary geographically in resemblance to their model is unclear. We characterized geographic variation in mimetic precision among four Batesian mimics of coral snakes. Each mimic occurs where its model is abundant (i.e. in 'deep sympatry'), rare (i.e. at the sympatry/allopatry boundary or 'edge sympatry') and absent (i.e. in allopatry). Geographic variation in mimetic precision was qualitatively different among these mimics. In one mimic, the most precise individuals occurred in edge sympatry; in another, they occurred in deep sympatry; in the third, they occurred in allopatry; and in the fourth, precise mimics were not concentrated anywhere throughout their range. Mimicry was less precise in allopatry than in sympatry in only two mimics. We present several nonmutually exclusive hypotheses for these patterns. Generally, examining geographic variation in mimetic precision - within and among different mimics - offers novel insights into the causes and consequences of mimicry.

show abstract

“…As yet, we are unaware of studies outside of egg mimicry in birds where the costs and benefits of mimicry to all protagonists have been calculated in terms of reproductive output – the currency of selection. However, there are some excellent experimental proofs of concept in Batesian systems involving snakes (Pfennig et al ., ; Pfennig & Mullen, ), plants (Johnson, Alexandersson, & Linder, ), bats (Barber & Conner, ), flies (de Jager & Ellis, ) and wasps (Wong & Shiestl, ), where the costs and benefits have been determined for one or two of the protagonists. Furthermore, we suggest that disentangling the components of selection resulting from the costs/benefits of mimicry versus purifying selection will give much more insight into how mimicry evolves.…”

Section: Strength Balance and Opposing Forces Of Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural selection in mimicry

Anderson

Jager

2019

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological mimicry has served as a salient example of natural selection for over a century, providing us with a dazzling array of very different examples across many unrelated taxa. We provide a conceptual framework that brings together apparently disparate examples of mimicry in a single model for the purpose of comparing how natural selection affects models, mimics and signal receivers across different interactions. We first analyse how model–mimic resemblance likely affects the fitness of models, mimics and receivers across diverse examples. These include classic Batesian and Müllerian butterfly systems, nectarless orchids that mimic Hymenoptera or nectar‐producing plants, caterpillars that mimic inert objects unlikely to be perceived as food, plants that mimic abiotic objects like carrion or dung and aggressive mimicry where predators mimic food items of their own prey. From this, we construct a conceptual framework of the selective forces that form the basis of all mimetic interactions. These interactions between models, mimics and receivers may follow four possible evolutionary pathways in terms of the direction of selection resulting from model–mimic resemblance. Two of these pathways correspond to the selective pressures associated with what is widely regarded as Batesian and Müllerian mimicry. The other two pathways suggest mimetic interactions underpinned by distinct selective pressures that have largely remained unrecognized. Each pathway is characterized by theoretical differences in how model–mimic resemblance influences the direction of selection acting on mimics, models and signal receivers, and the potential for consequent (co)evolutionary relationships between these three protagonists. The final part of this review describes how selective forces generated through model–mimic resemblance can be opposed by the basic ecology of interacting organisms and how those forces may affect the symmetry, strength and likelihood of (co)evolution between the three protagonists within the confines of the four broad evolutionary possibilities. We provide a clear and pragmatic visualization of selection pressures that portrays how different mimicry types may evolve. This conceptual framework provides clarity on how different selective forces acting on mimics, models and receivers are likely to interact and ultimately shape the evolutionary pathways taken by mimetic interactions, as well as the constraints inherent within these interactions.

show abstract

Mimics without models: causes and consequences of allopatry in Batesian mimicry complexes

Cited by 62 publications

References 65 publications

Spatial variation in the fitness of divergent aposematic phenotypes of the poison frog, Dendrobates tinctorius

Spatial variation in the fitness of divergent aposematic phenotypes of the poison frog, Dendrobates tinctorius

Geographic variation in mimetic precision among different species of coral snake mimics

Natural selection in mimicry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About