Robot predators in virtual ecologies: The importance of memory in mimicry studies

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 57, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 203-213

  Speed, Michael P ^a  

^a LIVERPOOL HOPE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; LEARNING; MIMICRY; MODELING; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION;

EID: 0033006558     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/anbe.1998.0943     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Arnold, S. J. 1978. The evolution of a special class of modifiable behaviours in relation to environmental pattern. American Naturalist, 112, 415-427.
2. Benson, W. W. 1977. On the supposed spectrum between Batesian and Muellerian mimicry. Evolution, 31, 454-455.
3. Bobisud, L. E. & Potraz, C. J. 1976. One-trial versus multi-trial learning for a predator encountering a model-mimic system. American Naturalist, 110, 121-128.
4. Bouton, M. E. 1993. Context, time and memory retrieval in the interference paradigms of Pavlovian learning. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 80-99.
5. Bouton, M. E. 1994. Conditioning, remembering and forgetting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behaviour Processes, 20, 219-231.
6. Brower, A. V. Z. 1996. Parallel race formation and the evolution of mimicry in Heliconius butterflies: a phylogenetic hypothesis from mitochondrial DNA sequences. Evolution, 50, 195-221.
7. Brower, L. P. 1984. Chemical defence in butterflies. In: The Biology of Butterflies (Ed. by R. I. Vane-Wright & P. R. Ackery), pp. 109-134. London: Academic Press.
8. Brower, L. P. & Brower, J. V. Z. 1964. Birds, butterflies and plant poisons: a study in ecological chemistry. Zoologica, 49, 137-159.
9. Brower, L. P., Brower, J. V. Z. & Collins, C. T. 1963. Experimental studies of mimicry. 7. Relative palatability and Muellerian mimicry among neotropical butterflies of the subfamily Heliconiinae. Zoologica, 48, 137-159.
10. Brower, L. P., Ryerson, W. N., Coppinger, L. L. & Glazier, S. C. 1968. Ecological chemistry and the palatability spectrum. Science, 161, 1349-1351.
11. Brower, L. P., Pough, F. H. & Meck, H. R. 1970. Theoretical investigations of automimicry. I. Single-trial learning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U.S.A., 66, 1059-1066.
12. Brower, L. P., Gibson, D. O., Moffitt, C. M. & Panchen, A. L. 1978. Cardenolide content of Danaus chrysippus butterflies from three areas of East Africa. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 10, 251-273.
13. Chai, P. 1986. Field observations and feeding experiments on the responses of rufous-tailed jacamars (Galbula ruficauda) to free-flying butterflies in a tropical forest. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 29, 161-189.
14. Clarke, C. A. & Sheppard, P. M. 1971. Further studies on the genetics of the mimetic butterfly Papilio memnon (L). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 263, 37-89.
15. Endler, J. A. 1991. Interactions between predators and prey. In: Behavioural Ecology (Ed. by J. R. Krebs & N. B. Davies), pp. 169-196. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific.
16. Estabrook, G. F. & Jespersen, D. C. 1974. Strategy for a predator encountering a model-mimic system. American Naturalist, 108, 443-457.
17. Fisher, R. A. 1930. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
18. Gavrilets, S. & Hastings, A. 1998. Coevolutionary chase in two-species systems with applications to mimicry. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 191, 415-427.
19. Guilford, T. 1988. The evolution of conspicuous colouration. American Naturalist, 131, S7-S21.
20. Guilford, T. & Dawkins, M. S. 1991. Receiver psychology and the evolution of animal signals. Animal Behaviour, 42, 1-14.
21. Hadeler, K. P., de Mottoni, P. & Tesei, A. 1982. Mimetic gain in Batesian and Müllerian mimicry. Oecologia, 53, 84-92.
22. Huheey, J. E. 1964. Studies of warning colour and mimicry. IV. A mathematical model of a model-mimic system. Ecology, 45, 185-188.
23. Huheey, J. E. 1976. Studies in warning coloration and mimicry. VII. Evolutionary consequences of a Batesian-Muellerian spectrum: a model for Müllerian mimicry. Evolution, 30, 86-93.
24. Huheey, J. E. 1980. Batesian and Muellerian mimicry: semantic and substantive differences of opinion. Evolution, 34, 1212-1215.
25. Huheey, J. E. 1988. Mathematical models of mimicry. American Naturalist, 131, S22-S41.
26. Jiggins, C. D., McMillan, W. O., Neukirchen, W. & Mallet, J. 1996. What can hybrid zones tell us about speciation? The case of Heliconius erato and H. himera (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 59, 221-242.
27. Leimar, O., Enquist, M. & Sillén-Tullberg, B. 1986. Evolutionary stability of aposematic coloration and prey unprofitability: a theoretical analysis. American Naturalist, 128, 469-490.
28. Leudeman, J. K., McMorris, F. R. & Warner, D. D. 1981. Predators encountering a model-mimic system with alternative prey. American Naturalist, 117, 1040-1048.
29. MacDougall, A. & Dawkins, M. S. 1998. Predator discrimination error and the benefits of Müllerian mimicry. Animal Behaviour, 55, 1281-1288.
30. Macnamara, J. & Houston, A. I. 1987. Memory and the efficient use of information. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 125, 385-395.
31. Malcom, S. B. 1991. Mimicry: status of a classical evolutionary paradigm. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 5, 57-62.
32. Mallet, J. 1986. Hybrid zones of Heliconius butterflies in Panama and the stability of warning colour clines. Heredity, 56, 191-202.
33. Mallet, J. & Singer, M. C. 1987. Individual selection, kin selection, and the shifting balance in the evolution of warning colours: the evidence from butterflies. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 32, 337-350.
34. Marples, N. M., Brakefield, P. M. & Cowie, R. J. 1989. Differences between the 7-spot and 2-spot ladybird beetles (Coccinellidae) in their toxic effects on a bird predator. Ecological Entomology, 14, 79-84.
35. Nur, U. 1970. Evolutionary rates of models and mimics in Batesian mimicry. American Naturalist, 104, 477-486.
36. Owen, R. E. & Owen, A. R. G. 1984. Mathematical paradigms for mimicry: recurrent sampling. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 109, 21 7-247.
37. Pearce, J. M., Kaye, H. & Hall, G. 1982. Predictive accuracy and stimulus associability: development of a model for Pavlovian learning. In: Quantitative Analyses of Behavior: Acquisition (Ed. by M. L. Commons, R. J. Commons & A. R. Wagner), pp. 241-256. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Ballinger.
38. Pinheiro, C. E. G. 1996. Palatability and escaping ability in neotropical butterflies: tests with kingbirds (Tyrannus melancholicus, Tyrannidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 59, 351-365.
39. Pough, F. H., Brower, L. P., Meck, H. R. & Kessell, S. R. 1973. Theoretical investigations of automimicry: multiple-trial learning and the palatability spectrum. Proceedings of the National Acadamy of Sciences U.S.A., 70, 2261-2265.
40. Rescorla, R. A. & Wagner, A. R. 1972. A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. In: Classical Conditioning II: Current Research and Theory (Ed. by A. Black & W. F. Prokasy), pp. 64-99. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
41. Ritland, D. B. 1995. Comparative unpalatability of mimetic viceroy butterflies (Limenitis archippus) from four south-eastern United States populations. Oecologia, 103, 327-336.
42. Roper, T. J. & Redston, S. 1987. Conspicuousness of distasteful prey affects the strength and durability of one-trial avoidance learning. Animal Behaviour, 35, 739-747.
43. Sargent, T. D. 1995. On the relative acceptabilities of local butterflies and moths to local birds. Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society, 49, 148-162.
44. Sheppard, P. M. & Turner, J. R. G. 1977. The existence of Müllerian mimicry. Evolution, 31, 452-453.
45. Sheppard, P. M., Turner, J. R. G., Brown, K. S. Jr., Benson, W. & Singer, M. C. 1985. Genetics and the evolution of muellerian mimicry in Heliconius butterflies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 308, 433-613.
46. Spear, N. E., Miller, J. S. & Jagielo, J. A. 1990. Animal memory and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 169-211.
47. Speed, M. P. 1990. Mimicry and the psychology of predation. Ph.D. thesis, University of Leeds.
48. Speed, M. P. 1993a. Muellerian mimicry and the psychology of predation. Animal Behaviour, 45, 571-580.
49. Speed, M. P. 1993b. When is mimicry good for predators? Animal Behaviour, 46, 1246-1247.
50. Speed, M. P. 1996. The evolution of mimicry: a study in behaviour, ecology and evolution. In: The First Romanian-British Geography Seminar (Ed. by G. Eredli & W. J. Chambers), pp. 127-141. Bucharest: Editura Universitatii din Bucaresti.
51. Turner, J. R. G. 1977. Butterfly mimicry: the genetical evolution of an adaptation. Evolutionary Biology, 10, 163-206.
52. Turner, J. R. G. 1987. The evolutionary dynamics of batesian and muellerian mimicry: similarities and differences. Ecological Entomology, 12, 81-95.
53. Turner, J. R. G. 1988. The evolution of mimicry: a solution to the problem of punctuated equilibrium. American Naturalist, 131, S42-S66.
54. Turner, J. R. G. 1995. Mimicry as a model for coevolution. In: Biodiversity and Evolution (Ed. by R. Arai, M. Kato & Y. Doi), pp. 131-150. Tokyo: The National Science Museum Foundation.
55. Turner, J. R. G. & Speed, M. P. 1996. Learning and memory in mimicry. I. Simulations of laboratory experiments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 351, 1157-1170.
56. Turner, J. R. G., Kearney, E. P. & Exton, L. S. 1984. Mimicry and the Monte Carlo predator: the palatability spectrum and the origins of mimicry. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 16, 33-40.