What kind of signals do mimetic tiger moths send? A phylogenetic test of wasp mimicry systems (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae: Euchromiini)

Simmons, Rebecca B.; Weller, Susan J.

doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.1970

Cited by 41 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of phylogenetics in determining evolutionary dynamics between two taxonomically distinct groups has so far only focussed on host–parasite (Brooks, 1988; Paterson et al. , 1993; Charleston & Robertson, 2002), or Müllerian mimicry evolution (Simmons & Weller, 2002; Machado et al. , 2004).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamics of the evolution of Batesian mimicry: molecular phylogenetic analysis of ant‐mimicking Myrmarachne (Araneae: Salticidae) species and their ant models

Ceccarelli

Crozier

2006

J of Evolutionary Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Batesian mimicry is seen as an example of evolution by natural selection, with predation as the main driving force. The mimic is under selective pressure to resemble its model, whereas it is disadvantageous for the model to be associated with the palatable mimic. In consequence one might expect there to be an evolutionary arms race, similar to the one involving host–parasite coevolution. In this study, the evolutionary dynamics of a Batesian mimicry system of model ants and ant‐mimicking salticids is investigated by comparing the phylogenies of the two groups. Although Batesian mimics are expected to coevolve with their models, we found the phylogenetic patterns of the models and the mimics to be indicative of adaptive radiation by the mimic rather than co‐speciation between the mimic and the model. This shows that there is strong selection pressure on Myrmarachne, leading to a high degree of polymorphism. There is also evidence of sympatric speciation in Myrmarachne, the reproductive isolation possibly driven by female mate choice in polymorphic species.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamics of the evolution of Batesian mimicry: molecular phylogenetic analysis of ant‐mimicking Myrmarachne (Araneae: Salticidae) species and their ant models

Ceccarelli

Crozier

2006

J of Evolutionary Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The use of the PTP test has been questioned (Peres-Neto & Marques 2000), but the test is still used in a number of recent studies (e.g. Simmons & Weller 2002).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple convergent evolution of arboreal life in oribatid mites indicates the primacy of ecology

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Frequent convergent evolution in phylogenetically unrelated taxa points to the importance of ecological factors during evolution, whereas convergent evolution in closely related taxa indicates the importance of favourable pre-existing characters (pre-adaptations). We investigated the transitions to arboreal life in oribatid mites (Oribatida, Acari), a group of mostly soil-living arthropods. We evaluated which general force-ecological factors, historical constraints or chance-was dominant in the evolution of arboreal life in oribatid mites. A phylogenetic study of 51 oribatid mite species and four outgroup taxa, using the ribosomal 18S rDNA region, indicates that arboreal life evolved at least 15 times independently. Arboreal oribatid mite species are not randomly distributed in the phylogenetic tree, but are concentrated among strongly sclerotized, sexual and evolutionary younger taxa. They convergently evolved a capitate sensillus, an anemoreceptor that either precludes overstimulation in the exposed bark habitat or functions as a gravity receptor. Sexual reproduction and strong sclerotization were important pre-adaptations for colonizing the bark of trees that facilitated the exploitation of living resources (e.g. lichens) and served as predator defence, respectively. Overall, our results indicate that ecological factors are most important for the observed pattern of convergent evolution of arboreal life in oribatid mites, supporting an adaptationist view of evolution.

show abstract

“…Despite theoretical [2][3][4][5][6], genetic [7,8], phylogenetic [9][10][11] and experimental studies [12 -17] of Mü llerian mimicry, the general conditions that select for it remain unclear. Specifically, there is continuing discussion about the importance of naive versus experienced predators [16 -19], and the importance of prey community structure in selection for mimicry [2,3,20 -22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prey community structure affects how predators select for Müllerian mimicry

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Müllerian mimicry describes the close resemblance between aposematic prey species; it is thought to be beneficial because sharing a warning signal decreases the mortality caused by sampling by inexperienced predators learning to avoid the signal. It has been hypothesized that selection for mimicry is strongest in multi-species prey communities where predators are more prone to misidentify the prey than in simple communities. In this study, wild great tits (Parus major) foraged from either simple (few prey appearances) or complex (several prey appearances) artificial prey communities where a specific model prey was always present. Owing to slower learning, the model did suffer higher mortality in complex communities when the birds were inexperienced. However, in a subsequent generalization test to potential mimics of the model prey (a continuum of signal accuracy), only birds that had foraged from simple communities selected against inaccurate mimics. Therefore, accurate mimicry is more likely to evolve in simple communities even though predator avoidance learning is slower in complex communities. For mimicry to evolve, prey species must have a common predator; the effective community consists of the predator's diet. In diverse environments, the limited diets of specialist predators could create 'simple community pockets' where accurate mimicry is selected for.

show abstract

What kind of signals do mimetic tiger moths send? A phylogenetic test of wasp mimicry systems (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae: Euchromiini)

Cited by 41 publications

References 50 publications

Dynamics of the evolution of Batesian mimicry: molecular phylogenetic analysis of ant‐mimicking Myrmarachne (Araneae: Salticidae) species and their ant models

Dynamics of the evolution of Batesian mimicry: molecular phylogenetic analysis of ant‐mimicking Myrmarachne (Araneae: Salticidae) species and their ant models

Multiple convergent evolution of arboreal life in oribatid mites indicates the primacy of ecology

Prey community structure affects how predators select for Müllerian mimicry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About