Rufous-tailed jacamars and aposematic butterflies: Do older birds attack novel prey?

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 285-290

  Langham, Gary M ^a,b  

^a Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Aposematism; Galbula ruficauda; Heliconius; Jacamar; Mullerian mimicry

Indexed keywords

AGE-RELATED DIFFERENCE; APOSEMATISM; MIMICRY; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; PREY SELECTION;

SOUTH AMERICA; VENEZUELA;

AVES; GALBULA RUFICAUDA; GALBULIDAE; HELICONIUS; HELICONIUS ERATO; HELICONIUS MELPOMENE; PAPILIONOIDEA;

EID: 32144460465     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arj027     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Benson WW, 1972. Natural selection for Mullerian mimicry in Heliconius erato in Costa Rica. Science 176:936-939.
2. Brower LP, Brower JVZ, Collins CT, 1963. Experimental studies of mimicry. 7. Relative palatability and Mullerian mimicry among neotropical butterflies of the subfamily Heliconinae. Zoologica 48:65-84.
3. Brower LP, Hower AS, Croze HJ, Brower JVZ, Stiles FG, 1964. Mimicry - differential advantage of color patterns in natural environment. Science 144:183-185.
4. Brower LP, Ryerson WN, Coppinger L, Glazier SC, 1968. Ecological chemistry and palatability spectrum. Science 161:1349-1350.
5. Burger J, Gochfeld M, 2001. Smooth-billed ani (Crotophaga ani) predation on butterflies in Mato Grosso, Brazil: risk decreases with increased group size. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 49:482-492.
6. Burton PJK, 1976. Feeding behavior in the Paradise jacamar and the swallow-wing. Living Bird 15:223-238.
7. Chai P, 1986. Field observations and feeding experiments on the responses of rufous-tailed jacamars (Galbula ruficauda) to free-flying butterflies in a tropical rain forest. Biol J Linn Soc 29:161-189.
8. Chai P, 1988. Wing coloration of free-flying neotropical butterflies as a signal learned by a specialized avian predator. Biotropica 20:20-30.
9. Chai P, 1996. Butterfly visual characteristics and ontogeny of responses to butterflies by a specialized tropical bird. Biol J Linn Soc 59:37-67.
10. Fitzpatrick JW, 1985. Form, foraging behavior, and adaptive radiation in the Tyrannidae. Ornithol Monogr 36:447-470.
11. Holzinger H, Holzinger R, 1994. Heliconius and related genera: Lepidoptera Nymphalidae: the genera Eueides, Neruda and Heliconius, 1st ed. Venette: Sciences Nat.
12. Joron M, Mallet JLB, 1998. Diversity in mimicry: paradox or paradigm? Trends Ecol Evol 13:461-466.
13. Kapan DD, 2001. Three-butterfly system provides a field test of mullerian mimicry. Nature 409:338-340.
14. Langham GM, 2004. Specialized avian predators repeatedly attack novel color morphs of Heliconius butterflies. Evolution 58: 2783-2787.
15. Lindstrom L, Alatalo R, Mappes J, 1999. Reactions of hand-reared and wild-caught predators toward warningly colored, gregarious, and conspicuous prey. Behav Ecol 10:317-322.
16. Mallet J, Barton N, 1989a. Inference from clines stabilized by frequency-dependent selection. Genetics 122:967-976.
17. Mallet J, Barton NH, 1989b. Strong natural selection in a warning-color hybrid zone. Evolution 43:421-431.
18. Mallet J, Barton N, Lamas G, Santisteban J, Muedas M, Eeley H, 1990. Estimates of selection and gene flow from measures of cline width and linkage disequilibrium in Heliconius hybrid zones. Genetics 124:921-936.
19. Mallet J, Joron M, 1999. Evolution of diversity in warning color and mimicry: polymorphisms, shifting balance, and speciation. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 30:201-233.
20. Marples NM, Roper TJ, Harper DGC, 1998. Responses of wild birds to novel prey: evidence for dietary conservatism. Oikos 83:161-165.
21. Pinheiro CEG, 1996. Palatability and escaping ability in neotropical butterflies: tests with wild kingbirds (Tyrannus melancholicus, Tyrannidae). Biol J Linn Soc 59:351-365.
22. Pinheiro CEG, 2003. Does Mullerian mimicry work in nature? Experiments with butterflies and birds (Tyrannidae). Biotropica 35:356-364.
23. Rising JD, Somers KM, 1989. The measurement of overall body size in birds. Auk 106:666-674.
24. Roper TJ, 1993. Effects of novelty on taste-avoidance learning in chicks. Behaviour 125:265-281.
25. Schlenoff DH, 1984. Novelty: a basis for generalization in prey selection. Anim Behav 32:919-921.
26. Sheppard PM, Turner JRG, Brown KS, Benson WW, Singer MC, 1985. Genetics and the evolution of Mullerian mimicry in Heliconius butterflies. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 308:433-613.
27. Sherry TW, 1984. Comparative dietary ecology of sympatric insectivorous flycatchers (Tyrannidae). Ecol Monogr 54:313-338.
28. Skutch AF, 1983. Birds of tropical America, 1st ed. Austin: University of Texas Press.
29. Speed MP, 2000. Warning signals, receiver psychology and predator memory. Anim Behav 60:269-278.
30. Tobias J, 2002. Family Galbulidae. In: Handbook of the birds of the world, vol. 7 (del Hoyo J, Elliott A, Sargatal J, eds). Barcelona, Spain and Cambridge, UK: Lynx Editions; 74-101.
31. Turner JRG, 1971a. 2000 generations of hybridisation in a Heliconius butterfly. Evolution 25:471-482.
32. Turner JRG, 1971b. Genetics of some polymorphic forms of butterflies Heliconius melpomene (Linnaeus) and H. erato (Linnaeus). 2. Hybridization of subspecies of H. melpomene from Surinam and Trinidad. Zoologica 56:125-157.
33. Turner JRG, Speed MP, 1996. Learning and memory in mimicry. 1. Simulations of laboratory experiments. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 351:1157-1170.