78
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The evolution of Müllerian mimicry

      review-article
      Die Naturwissenschaften
      Springer-Verlag
      Müllerian mimicry, Anti-apostatic selection, Warning signals, Predation

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          It is now 130 years since Fritz Müller proposed an evolutionary explanation for the close similarity of co-existing unpalatable prey species, a phenomenon now known as Müllerian mimicry. Müller’s hypothesis was that unpalatable species evolve a similar appearance to reduce the mortality involved in training predators to avoid them, and he backed up his arguments with a mathematical model in which predators attack a fixed number ( n) of each distinct unpalatable type in a given season before avoiding them. Here, I review what has since been discovered about Müllerian mimicry and consider in particular its relationship to other forms of mimicry. Müller’s specific model of associative learning involving a “fixed n” in a given season has not been supported, and several experiments now suggest that two distinct unpalatable prey types may be just as easy to learn to avoid as one. Nevertheless, Müller’s general insight that novel unpalatable forms have higher mortality than common unpalatable forms as a result of predation has been well supported by field experiments. From its inception, there has been a heated debate over the nature of the relationship between Müllerian co-mimics that differ in their level of defence. There is now a growing awareness that this relationship can be mediated by many factors, including synergistic effects between co-mimics that differ in their mode of defence, rates of generalisation among warning signals and concomitant changes in prey density as mimicry evolves. I highlight areas for future enquiry, including the possibility of Müllerian mimicry systems based on profitability rather than unprofitability and the co-evolution of defence.

          Related collections

          Most cited references164

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          XXXII. Contributions to an Insect Fauna of the Amazon Valley. Lepidoptera: Heliconidae.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Sequestration of defensive substances from plants by Lepidoptera.

            A number of aposematic butterfly and diurnal moth species sequester unpalatable or toxic substances from their host plants rather than manufacturing their own defensive substances. Despite a great diversity in their life histories, there are some general features in the selective utilization of plant secondary metabolites to achieve effective protection from predators. This review illustrates the biochemical, physiological, and ecological characteristics of phytochemical-based defense systems that can shed light on the evolution of the widely developed sequestering lifestyles among the Lepidoptera.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Predator mixes and the conspicuousness of aposematic signals.

              Conspicuous warning signals of unprofitable prey are a defense against visually hunting predators. They work because predators learn to associate unprofitability with bright coloration and because strong signals are detectable and memorable. However, many species that can be considered defended are not very conspicuous; they have weak warning signals. This phenomenon has previously been ignored in models and experiments. In addition, there is significant within- and among-species variation among predators in their search behavior, in their visual, cognitive, and learning abilities, and in their resistance to defenses. In this article we explore the effects of variable predators on models that combine positive frequency-dependent, frequency-independent, and negative frequency-dependent predation and show that weak signaling of aposematic species can evolve if predators vary in their tendency to attack defended prey.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +1-613-5202600 , +1-613-5203539 , sherratt@ccs.carleton.ca
                Journal
                Naturwissenschaften
                Die Naturwissenschaften
                Springer-Verlag (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                0028-1042
                1432-1904
                10 June 2008
                August 2008
                : 95
                : 8
                : 681-695
                Affiliations
                Department of Biology, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6 Canada
                Article
                403
                10.1007/s00114-008-0403-y
                2443389
                18542902
                1589a157-0d8e-4ab5-9a33-e9feae7a64fa
                © Springer-Verlag 2008
                History
                : 9 February 2008
                : 26 April 2008
                : 29 April 2008
                Categories
                Review
                Custom metadata
                © Springer-Verlag 2008

                Uncategorized
                predation,warning signals,müllerian mimicry,anti-apostatic selection
                Uncategorized
                predation, warning signals, müllerian mimicry, anti-apostatic selection

                Comments

                Comment on this article