The deflection hypothesis: Eyespots on the margins of butterfly wings do not influence predation by lizards

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

Volumn 92, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 661-667

  Vlieger, Leon ^a,b   Brakefield, Paul M ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

Author keywords

Anolis carolinensis; Bicyclus anynana; Butterfly wing patterns; Evolution; Feeding experiments

Indexed keywords

BUTTERFLY; ECOMORPHOLOGY; EVOLUTION; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; LIZARD; PREDATION; VULNERABILITY; WING MORPHOLOGY;

ANOLIS; ANOLIS CAROLINENSIS; AVES; BICYCLUS ANYNANA; PAPILIONOIDEA; SQUAMATA; VERTEBRATA;

EID: 36849003601     PISSN: 00244066     EISSN: 10958312     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2007.00863.x     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Blest AD. 1957. The function of eyespot patterns in the Lepidoptera. Behaviour 11 : 209 255.
2. Brakefield PM. 1984. The ecological genetics of quantitative characters in Maniola jurtina and other butterflies. In : Vane Wright RI, Ackery PR, eds. The biology of butterflies. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press, 167 190.
3. Brakefield PM, Frankino WA. 2007. Polyphenisms in Lepidoptera: multidisciplinary approaches to studies in evolution. In : Whitman DW, Ananthakrishnan TN, eds. Phenotypic plasticity in insects. Mechanisms and consequences. Plymouth : Science Publishers Inc. 121 152.
4. Brakefield PM, Larsen TB. 1984. The evolutionary significance of dry and wet season forms in some tropical butterflies. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 22 : 1 12.
5. Brakefield PM, Reitsma N. 1991. Phenotypic plasticity, seasonal climate and the population biology of Bicyclus butterflies. Ecological Entomology 16 : 291 303.
6. Branch B. 1988. A field guide to the snakes and other reptiles of Southern Africa. Cape Town : Struik.
7. Brockie RE. 1972. Evolutionary studies on Maniola jurtina in Sicily. Heredity 28 : 337 346.
8. Chai P. 1996. Butterfly visual characteristics and ontogeny of responses to butterflies by a specialized tropical bird. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 59 : 37 67.
9. Cordero C. 2001. A different look at the false head of butterflies. Ecological Entomology 26 : 106 108.
10. D'Abrera B. 1988. Butterflies of the neotropical region, part V, Nymphalidae (conc) and Satyridae. London : Hill House Publishers.
11. Dennis RLH, Porter K, Williams WR. 1986. Ocellation in Coenonympha tullia (Müller) (Lepidoptera: Satyridae). Entomologist's Gazette 37 : 133 172.
12. DeVries PJ. 2002. Differential wing toughness in distasteful and palatable butterflies: direct evidence supports unpalatable theory. Biotropica 34 : 176 181.
13. Dziuraweic S, Derȩgowski JB. 2002. The eyes have it: a perceptual investigation of eyespots. Perception 31 : 1313 1322.
14. Edmunds M. 1974. Significance of beak marks on butterfly wings. Oikos 25 : 117 118.
15. Ehrlich PR, Ehrlich AH. 1982. Lizard predation on tropical butterflies. Journal of the Lepidopterist's Society 36 : 148 152.
16. Fite KV, Lister B. 1981. Bifoveal vision in Anolis lizards. Brain, Behaviour and Evolution 19 : 144 154.
17. Fleishman LJ. 1986. Motion detection in the presence and absence of background motion in an Anolis lizard. Journal of Comparative Physiology. A, Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioural Physiology 159 : 711 720.
18. Fleishman LJ. 1992. The influence of the sensory system and the environment on motion patterns in the visual display of anoline lizards and other vertebrates. American Naturalist 139 : 36 61.
19. Fleishman LJ, Loew ER, Leal M. 1993. Ultraviolet vision in lizards. Nature 365 : 397.
20. Goodman D. 1971. Differential selection of immobile prey among terrestrial and riparian lizards. American Midland Naturalist 86 : 217 219.
21. Greenberg B, Noble GK. 1944. Social behaviour of the American chameleon (Anolis carolinensis Voigt). Physiological Zoology 17 : 392 439.
22. Hedges NG. 1983. Reptiles and amphibians of East Africa. Nairobi : Kenya Literature Bureau.
23. Hill RI, Vaca JF. 2004. Differential wing strength of Pierella butterflies (Nymphalidae, Satyrinae) supports the deflection hypothesis. Biotropica 36 : 362 370.
24. Lyytinen A, Brakefield PM, Lindström L, Mappes J. 2004. Does predation maintain eyespot plasticity in Bicyclus anynana? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 271 : 279 283.
25. Lyytinen A, Brakefield PM, Mappes J. 2003. Significance of butterfly eyespots as an anti-predator device in ground-based and aerial attacks. Oikos 100 : 373 379.
26. Marples NM, Kelly DJ. 2001. Neophobia and dietary conservatism: two distinct processes? Evolutionary Ecology 13 : 641 653.
27. Pianka ER. 1977. Reptilian species diversity. In : Tinkle DW, ed. Ecology and behaviour A. London : Academic Press, 1 34.
28. Poulton EB. 1890. Colors and markings which direct the attention of an enemy to some non-vital part, but which are not attended by unpleasant qualities. In : Poulton EB, eds. The colours of animals, 2nd edn. London : Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., 204 209.
29. Robbins RK. 1980. The lycaenid 'false head' hypothesis: historical review and quantitative analysis. Journal of the Lepidopterist's Society 34 : 194 208.
30. Robbins RK. 1981. The 'false head' hypothesis: predation and wing pattern variation of lycaenid butterflies. American Naturalist 118 : 770 775.
31. Roughgarden J. 1995. Anolis lizards of the Caribbean; ecology, evolution and plate tectonics. New York, NY : Oxford University Press.
32. Schwenk K. 1995. Of tongues and noses: chemoreception in lizards and snakes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10 : 7 12.
33. Sexton OJ. 1964. Differential predation by the lizard Anolis carolinensis upon unicolored and polycoloured insects after an interval of no contact. Animal Behaviour 12 : 101 110.
34. Shafir S, Roughgarden J. 1994. Instrumental discrimination conditioning of Anolis cristatellus in the field with food as a reward. Caribbean Journal of Science 30 : 228 233.
35. Stamps JA. 1977. The function of the survey posture in Anolis lizards. Copeia 4 : 756 758.
36. Stanger-Hall KF, Zelmer DA, Bergren C, Burns SA. 2001. Taste discrimination in a lizard (Anolis carolinensis, Polychrotidae). Copeia 2 : 490 498.
37. Stevens M. 2005. The role of eyespots as anti-predator mechanisms, principally demonstrated in the Lepidoptera. Biological Reviews 80 : 573 588.
38. Sword GA. 2001. Tasty on the outside, but toxic in the middle: grasshopper regurgitation and host-plant mediated toxicity to a vertebrate predator. Oecologia 128 : 416 421.
39. Tiemann VG. 1972. Untersuchungen uber das Farbsehvermogen einiger tagaktiver Echsen und Schildkroten, sowie der Blindschleiche. Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychologie 31 : 337 347.
40. Tonner M, Novotný V, Lepš J, Komárek S. 1993. False head wing patterns of the Burmese Junglequeen butterfly and the deception of avian predators. Biotropica 25 : 474 478.
41. Vallin A, Jakobsson S, Lind J, Wiklund C. 2005. Prey survival by predator intimidation: an experimental study of peacock butterfly defence against blue tits. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 272 : 1203 1207.
42. Vallin A, Jakobsson S, Lind J, Wiklund C. 2006. Crypsis versus intimidation - anti-predation defence in three closely related butterflies. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology 59 : 455 459.
43. Van Someren VGL. 1922. Notes on certain colour patterns in Lycaenidae. Journal of the East Africa and Uganda Natural History Society 17 : 18 21.
44. Webb JE, Wallwork JA, Elgood JH. 1978. Guide to living reptiles. London : Macmillan.
45. Wourms MK, Wasserman FE. 1985. Butterfly wing markings are more advantageous during handling than during the initial strike of an avian predator. Evolution 39 : 845 851.
46. Young AM. 1979. The evolution of eyespots in tropical butterflies in response to feeding on rotting fruit: an hypothesis. Journal of the New York Entomological Society 87 : 66 77.
47. Young AM. 1980. The interaction of predators and 'eyespot butterflies' feeding on rotting fruits and soupy fungi in tropical forests: variations on a theme developed by the Muyshondts and Arthur M. Shapiro. Entomologist's Record 90 : 63 69.