How does viewing angle affect the perceived accuracy of Batesian mimicry in hoverflies?

Abstract

Despite Batesian mimicry often eliciting predator avoidance, many Batesian mimics, such as some species of hoverfly (Syrphidae), are considered to have an “imperfect” resemblance to their model. One possible explanation for the persistence of apparently imperfect mimicry is that human perceptions of mimicry are different from those of natural predators. Natural predators of hoverflies have different visual and cognitive systems from humans, and they may encounter mimics in a different way. For example, whilst humans often encounter hoverflies at rest on vegetation, or in photographs or textbooks, where they are typically viewed from above, natural predators may approach hoverflies from the side or below. To test how viewing angle affects the perception of mimicry, images of mimetic hoverflies and their models (wasps and bees) were shown from different angles in an online survey. Participants were asked to distinguish between the images of models and mimics. The results show that the viewing angle does affect perceived mimicry in some species, although it does not provide a complete explanation for the persistence of imperfect mimicry in nature. The effect is also highly species-specific. This suggests that to understand better how selection has shaped mimetic accuracy in hoverflies and other taxa, further study is required of the viewing angles that predators utilize most commonly in nature.

Abstract

The angle a hoverfly is seen from effects if it is mistaken for a harmful insect. Hoverflies look like bees or wasps so that predators will avoid them, but this mimicry is often imperfect. We show that the angle from which a hoverfly is seen can affect how accurately it is identified by predators and whether it is mistaken for a wasp or bee. This effect is species-specific, which hints that the angles of approach by predators that are important to the evolution of mimicry vary among hoverflies.