The Evolution of Warning Signals as Reliable Indicators of Prey Defense
- 1 October 2003
- journal article
- Published by University of Chicago Press in The American Naturalist
- Vol. 162 (4) , 377-389
- https://doi.org/10.1086/378047
Abstract
It is widely argued that defended prey have tended to evolve conspicuous traits because predators more readily learn to avoid defended prey when they are conspicuous. However, a rival theory proposes that defended prey have evolved such characters because it allows them to be distinguished from undefended prey. Here we investigated how the attributes of defended (unprofitable) and undefended (profitable) computer-generated prey species tended to evolve when they were subject to selection by foraging humans. When cryptic forms of defended and undefended species were similar in appearance but their conspicuous forms were not, defended prey became conspicuous while undefended prey remained cryptic. Indeed, in all of our experiments, defended prey invariably evolved any trait that enabled them to be distinguished from undefended prey, even if such traits were cryptic. When conspicuous mutants of defended prey were extremely rare, they frequently overcame their initial disadvantage by chance. When Batesian mimicry of defended species was possible, defended prey evolved unique traits or characteristics that would make undefended prey vulnerable. Overall, our work supports the contention that warning signals are selected for their reliability as indicators of defense rather than to capitalize on any inherent educational biases of predators.Keywords
This publication has 53 references indexed in Scilit:
- The coevolution of warning signalsProceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 2002
- Evolution of suicidal signalsNature, 2002
- Visual predators select for crypticity and polymorphism in virtual preyNature, 2002
- THE EFFECTS OF PREDATOR LEARNING, FORGETTING, AND RECOGNITION ERRORS ON THE EVOLUTION OF WARNING COLORATIONEvolution, 2000
- Slow movement increases the survivorship of a chemically defended grasshopper in predatory encountersOecologia, 1998
- Coevolutionary Chase in Two-species Systems with Applications to MimicryJournal of Theoretical Biology, 1998
- Aerial Predation and Butterfly Design: How Palatability, Mimicry, and the Need for Evasive Flight Constrain Mass AllocationThe American Naturalist, 1991
- Foraging in a Dynamic Mimicry ComplexThe American Naturalist, 1985
- Experimental Studies of Mimicry. IV. The Reactions of Starlings to Different Proportions of Models and MimicsThe American Naturalist, 1960
- Some Characteristics of Simple Types of Predation and ParasitismThe Canadian Entomologist, 1959