Which traits do observers use to distinguish Batesian mimics from their models?

Taylor, Christopher H.; Warrin, Jonathan; Gilbert, Francis; Reader, Tom

doi:10.1093/beheco/arw166

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hoverfly and wasp images were sourced primarily from reliable internet sites run by taxonomic experts where species identification was judged to be accurate by the research community (see the Supporting Information). Multiple images were sourced from Taylor et al (2017) and Speight and de Courcy Williams (2018). Images were selected following a hierarchy of rules for quality, sexual dimorphism, and intraspecific variation.…”

Section: Image Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2012; Taylor et al. 2017). However, many supposedly mimetic hoverflies do not accurately resemble their putative models, and others are apparently not mimetic at all.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the best-known systems for the study of imperfect mimicry is provided by hoverfly mimics (Diptera: Syrphidae), which are probably defenseless, and their harmful hymenopteran models. Many hoverflies imitate Hymenoptera behaviorally (Golding et al 2005;Penney et al 2014), acoustically (Moore and Hassall 2016), and morphologically, in the form of color, pattern, shape, and size (Howarth et al 2004;Penney et al 2012;Taylor et al 2017). However, many supposedly mimetic hoverflies do not accurately resemble their putative models, and others are apparently not mimetic at all.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mapping the evolution of accurate Batesian mimicry of social wasps in hoverflies

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae) provide an excellent opportunity to study the evolution of Batesian mimicry, where defenseless prey avoid predation by evolving to resemble defended "model" species. Although some hoverflies beautifully resemble their hymenopteran models, others seem to be poor mimics or are apparently nonmimetic. The reasons for this variation are still enigmatic despite decades of research. Here, we address this issue by mapping social-wasp mimicry across the phylogeny of Holarctic hoverflies. Using the "distance transform" technique, we calculate an objective measure of the abdominal pattern similarity between 167 hoverfly species and a widespread putative model, the social wasp, Vespula germanica. We find that good wasp mimicry has evolved several times, and may have also been lost, leading to the presence of nonmimics deep within clades of good mimics. Body size was positively correlated with similarity to the model, supporting previous findings that smaller species are often poorer mimics. Additionally, univoltine species were less accurate wasp mimics than multivoltine and bivoltine species. Hence, variation in the accuracy of Batesian mimics may reflect variation in the opportunity for selection caused by differences in prey value or signal perception (influenced by body size) and phenology or generation time (influenced by voltinism).

show abstract

Section: Image Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2012; Taylor et al. 2017). However, many supposedly mimetic hoverflies do not accurately resemble their putative models, and others are apparently not mimetic at all.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mapping the evolution of accurate Batesian mimicry of social wasps in hoverflies

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(2) Batesian mimicry Batesian mimicry (Table 1) is widespread in nature (Joron & Mallet, 1998) and is even effective in duping people (Kikuchi et al, 2015;Taylor et al, 2017). Some of the more extraordinary examples include lizards that impersonate beetles (Huey & Pianka, 1977), caterpillars that mimic snakes (Janzen, Hallwachs & Burns, 2010), and bird chicks that imitate caterpillars (Londoño, García & Sánchez-Martínez, 2014).…”

Section: Mechanisms Dependent On Other Individualsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards an ecology of protective coloration

Caro

Koneru

2020

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The strategies underlying different forms of protective coloration are well understood but little attention has been paid to the ecological, life‐history and behavioural circumstances under which they evolve. While some comparative studies have investigated the ecological correlates of aposematism, and background matching, the latter particularly in mammals, few have examined the ecological correlates of other types of protective coloration. Here, we first outline which types of defensive coloration strategies may be exhibited by the same individual; concluding that many protective coloration mechanisms can be employed simultaneously, particularly in conjunction with background matching. Second, we review the ecological predictions that have been made for each sort of protective coloration mechanism before systematically surveying phylogenetically controlled comparative studies linking ecological and social variables to antipredator defences that involve coloration. We find that some a priori predictions based on small‐scale empirical studies and logical arguments are indeed supported by comparative data, especially in relation to how illumination affects both background matching and self‐shadow concealment through countershading; how body size is associated with countershading, motion dazzle, flash coloration and aposematism, although only in selected taxa; how immobility may promote background matching in ambush predators; and how mobility may facilitate motion dazzle. Examination of nearly 120 comparative tests reveals that many focus on ecological variables that have little to do with predictions derived from antipredator defence theory, and that broad‐scale ecological studies of defence strategies that incorporate phylogenetics are still very much in their infancy. We close by making recommendations for future evolutionary ecological research.

show abstract

“…Hence, this system offers a remarkable opportunity to characterize the salience of multicomponent aposematic signals in a more natural context, a suggestion that was brought to attention by previous studies (e.g. Kikuchi et al., 2015; Taylor et al., 2017). In parallel, recent experiments with artificial paper replicas of butterflies in natural habitats have provided a valuable tool to study multiple aspects of bird predation‐driven mimicry (Finkbeiner et al., 2014, 2017, 2018), with direct application to our study question.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Field evidence for colour mimicry overshadowing morphological mimicry

Corral‐Lopez

Varg

Cano-Cobos

et al. 2020

Journal of Animal Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Imperfect mimicry may be maintained when the various components of an aposematic signal have different salience for predators. Experimental laboratory studies provide robust evidence for this phenomenon. Yet, evidence from natural settings remains scarce. We studied how natural bird predators assess multiple features in a multicomponent aposematic signal in the Neotropical ‘clear wing complex’ mimicry ring, dominated by glasswing butterflies. We evaluated two components of the aposematic signal, wing colouration and wing morphology, in a predation experiment based on artificial replicas of glasswing butterflies (model) and Polythoridae damselflies (mimics) in their natural habitat. We also studied the extent of the colour aposematic signal in the local insect community. Finally, we inspected the nanostructures responsible for this convergent colour signal, expected to highly differ between these phylogenetically distinct species. Our results provide direct evidence for a stronger salience of wing colouration than wing morphology, as well as stronger selection on imperfect than in perfect colour mimics. Additionally, investigations of how birds perceive wing colouration of the local insect community provides further evidence that a UV‐reflective white colouration is being selected as the colour aposematic signal of the mimicry ring. Using electron microscopy, we also suggest that damselflies have convergently evolved the warning colouration through a pre‐adaptation. These findings provide a solid complement to previous experimental evidence suggesting a key influence of the cognitive assessment of predators driving the evolution of aposematic signals and mimicry rings.

show abstract

Which traits do observers use to distinguish Batesian mimics from their models?

Cited by 7 publications

References 48 publications

Mapping the evolution of accurate Batesian mimicry of social wasps in hoverflies

Mapping the evolution of accurate Batesian mimicry of social wasps in hoverflies

Towards an ecology of protective coloration

Field evidence for colour mimicry overshadowing morphological mimicry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About