Direction and strength of selection by predators for the color of the aposematic wood tiger moth

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 580-587

  Lindstedt, C ^a,b   Eager, H ^b   Ihalainen, E ^a   Kahilainen, A ^a   Stevens, M ^b   Mappes, J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Arctiidae; conspicuousness; predator community; predator perception; warning signals

Indexed keywords

APOSEMATISM; AVOIDANCE REACTION; COLOR MORPH; LABORATORY METHOD; MOTH; PASSERINE; PREY SELECTION; PROBABILITY; SIGNAL; SURVIVAL; WING MORPHOLOGY;

ARCTIIDAE; AVES; LEPIDOPTERA;

EID: 79955393027     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arr017     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Alatalo RV, Mappes J. 1996. Tracking the evolution of warning signals. Nature. 382:708-710.
2. Barnett CA, Bateson M, Rowe C. 2007. State-dependent decision making: educated predators strategically trade off the costs and benefits of consuming aposematic prey. Behav Ecol. 18:645-651. (Pubitemid 47216474)
3. Beatty CD, Beirinckx K, Sherratt TN. 2004. The evolution of Müllerian mimicry in multispecies communities. Nature. 431:63-67. (Pubitemid 39215107)
4. Bezzerides A, MacGraw K, Parker R, Husseini J. 2007. Elytra color as a signal of chemical defense in the Asian ladybird beetle Harmonia Axyridis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 61:1401-1408. (Pubitemid 46944565)
5. Calvert WH. 1979. Mortality of the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus L.): avian predation at five overwintering sites in Mexico. Science. 204:847-851.
6. Cott HB. 1940. Adaptive coloration in animals. London: Methuen. p. 508.
7. Cuthill IC. 2006. Vol. I: mechanisms and measurements. In: Hill GE, McGraw KJ, editors. Bird coloration. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press. p. 3-40.
8. Cuthill IC, Stevens M, Sheppard J, Maddocks T, Párraga CA, Troscianko TS. 2005. Disruptive coloration and background pattern matching. Nature. 434:72-74. (Pubitemid 40349386)
9. Darst C, Cummings ME, Cannatella DC. 2006. A mechanism for diversity in warning signals: conspicuousness versus toxicity in poison frogs. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 103:5852-5857.
10. Edmunds M. 1974. Defense in animals: a survey of anti-predator defenses. New York: Longman. p. 62-135.
11. Endler JA. 1991. Interactions between predators and prey. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB, editors. Behavioural ecology. an evolutionary approach. Cambridge: Blackwell Science. p. 169-196.
12. Endler JA, Mappes J. 2004. Predator mixes and the conspicuousness of aposematic signals. Am Nat. 163:532-547. (Pubitemid 38630546)
13. Exnerová A, Landová E, Štys P, Fuchs R, Prokopová M, Cehláriková P. 2003. Reactions of passerine birds to aposematic and non-aposematic firebugs (Pyrrhocoris apterus; Heteroptera). Biol J Linn Soc. 78:517-525. (Pubitemid 36453618)
14. Exnerová A, Štys P, Fučíková E, Veselá S, Svádová K, Prokopová M, JaroŠík V, Fuchs R, Landová E. 2007. Avoidance of aposematic prey in European tits (Paridae): learned or innate? Behav Ecol. 18: 148-156. (Pubitemid 46026325)
15. Exnerová A, Svadová K, Stys P, Barcalová S, Landová E, Prokopová M, Fuchs R, Socha R. 2006. Importance of colour in the reaction of passerine predators to aposematic prey: experiments with mutants of Pyrrhocoris apterus (Heteroptera). Biol J Linn Soc. 88:143-153.
16. Fink LS, Brower LP. 1981. Birds can overcome the cardenolide defense of monarch butterflies in Mexico. Nature. 291:67-70.
17. Fisher RA. 1930. The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
18. Friman V, Lindstedt C, Hiltunen T, Laakso J, Mappes J. 2009. Predation on the multiple trophic levels shapes the evolution of pathogen virulence. Plos One. 4(8):e6761.
19. Gamberale-Stille G. 2000. Decision time and prey gregariousness influence attack probability in naïve and experienced predators. Anim Behav. 60:95-99.
20. Gamberale-Stille G. 2001. Benefit by contrast: an experiment with live aposematic prey. Behav Ecol. 12:768-772. (Pubitemid 34029721)
21. Gamberale-Stille G, Tullberg B. 1999. Experienced chicks show biased avoidance of stronger signals: an experiment with natural color variation in live aposematic prey. Evol Ecol. 13:579-589.
22. Gittleman JL, Harvey PH. 1980. Why are distasteful prey not cryptic? Nature. 286:149-150.
23. Grill CP, Moore AJ. 1998. Effects of a larval antipredator response and larval diet on adult phenotype in an aposematic ladybird beetle. Oecologia. 114:274-282. (Pubitemid 28195256)
24. Guilford T. 1986. How do "warning colors" work? Conspicuousness may reduce recognition errors in experienced predators. Anim Behav. 34:286-288.
25. Ham AD, Ihalainen E, Lindström L, Mappes J. 2006. Does color matter? The importance of color in avoidance learning, memorability and generalisation. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 60:482-491.
26. Hart NS, Partridge JC, Cuthill IC, Bennett ATD. 2000. Visual pigments, oil droplets, ocular media and cone photoreceptor distribution in two species of passerine: the blue tit (Parus caeruleus L.) and the blackbird (Turdus merula L.). J Comp Physiol A. 186:375-387. (Pubitemid 30308587)
27. Ihalainen E, Lindström L, Mappes J. 2007. Investigating Müllerian mimicry: predator learning and variation in prey defenses. J Evol Biol. 20:780-791.
28. Joron M, Mallet JLB. 1998. Diversity in mimicry: paradox or paradigm? Trends Ecol Evol. 13:461-466. (Pubitemid 28487320)
29. Kapan DD. 2001. Three-butterfly system provides a field test of müllerian mimicry. Nature. 409:338-340. (Pubitemid 32151237)
30. Lindstedt C, Lindström L, Mappes J. 2008. Hairiness and warning colors as components of antipredator defense: additive or interactive benefits? Anim Behav. 75:1703-1713.
31. Lindstedt C, Lindström L, Mappes J. 2009. Thermoregulation constrains effective warning signal expression. Evolution. 63:469-478.
32. Lindstedt C, Reudler Talsma J, Ihalainen E, Lindström L, Mappes J. 2010. Diet quality affects coloration indirectly: excretion costs in a generalist herbivore. Evolution. 64:68-78.
33. Lindström L, Alatalo R, Lyytinen A, Mappes J. 2001. Predator experience on cryptic prey affects the survival of conspicuous aposematic prey. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 268:357-361. (Pubitemid 32206805)
34. Lindström L, Alatalo RV, Lyytinen A, Mappes J. 2004. The effect of alternative prey on the dynamics of Batesian and Müllerian mimicries. Evolution. 58:1294-1302. (Pubitemid 38826281)
35. Lindström L, Alatalo RV, Mappes J. 1999. Inherited avoidance towards color, gregariousness and conspicuousness-experiments with naive and experienced predators. Behav Ecol. 10:317-322.
36. Lindström L, Alatalo R, Mappes J, Riipi M, Vertainen L. 1999. Can aposematic signals evolve by gradual change? Nature. 397:249-251.
37. Mallet JLB, Barton NH. 1989. Strong natural selection in a warningcolor Müllerian mimicry. Evol Ecol. 13:777-806.
38. Mappes J, Alatalo RV. 1997. Effect of novelty and gregariousness in survival of aposematic prey. Behav Ecol. 8:174-177.
39. Mappes J, Marples N, Endler J. 2005. The complex business of survival by aposematism. Trends Ecol Evol. 20:598-603. (Pubitemid 41502812)
40. Marples NM, Roper TJ. 1997. Response of domestic chicks to methyl anthranilate odour. Anim Behav. 53:1263-1270. (Pubitemid 27275175)
41. Marples NM, Roper TJ, Harper DGC. 1998. Response of wild birds to novel prey: evidence of dietary conservatism. Oikos. 83:161-165. (Pubitemid 28428565)
42. Marshall NJ. 2000. Communication and camouflage with the same 'bright' colors in reef fishes. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 355: 1243-1248.
43. Merilaita S, Kaitala V. 2002. Community structure and the evolution of aposematic coloration. Ecol Lett. 5:495-501. (Pubitemid 34824908)
44. Müller F. 1879. Ituna and Thyridia: a remarkable case of mimicry in butterflies. Proc Entomol Soc Lond. XX-XXIX.
45. OjalaK,LindströmL,Mappes J, 2007, Lifehistoryconstraintsandwarning signalexpressioninarctiidmoth.FunctEcol.21: 1162-1167.
46. Osorio D, Jones CD, Vorobyev M. 1999. Accurate memory for color but not contrast in domestic chicks. Curr Biol. 9:199-202. (Pubitemid 29120383)
47. Osorio D, Vorobyev M. 2005. Photoreceptor spectral sensitivities in terrestrial animals: adaptations for luminance and color vision. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 272:1745-1752. (Pubitemid 41414652)
48. Pinheiro CEG. 1996. Palatability and escaping ability in Neotropical butterflies: tests with wild kingbirds (Tyrannus melancholicus, Tyrannidae). Biol J Linn Soc. 59:351-365.
49. Poulton EB. 1890. The colors of animals: their meaning and use especially considered in the case of insects. Vol. xiii. 2nd ed. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner and co. p. 360.
50. Prudic K, Skemp AK, Papaj DR. 2007. Aposematic coloration, luminance contrast, and the benefits of conspicuousness. Behav Ecol. 18:41-46. (Pubitemid 46026310)
51. Riipi M, Alatalo R, Lindström L, Mappes J. 2001. Multiple benefits of gregariousness cover detectability costs in aposematic aggregations. Nature. 413:512-514. (Pubitemid 32938747)
52. Roper TJ. 1990. Responses of domestic chicks to artificially colored insect prey: effects of previous experience and background color. Anim Behav. 39:466-473.
53. Roper TJ, Marples NM. 1997. Odour and color as cues for tasteavoidance learning in domestic chicks. Anim Behav. 53:1241-1250. (Pubitemid 27275173)
54. Roper TJ, Redston S. 1987. Conspicuousness of distasteful prey affects the strength and durability of one-trial avoidance learning. Anim Behav. 35:739-747.
55. Rowe C, Lindström L, Lyytinen A. 2004. The importance of pattern similarity between Müllerian mimics in predator avoidance learning. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 271:407-413. (Pubitemid 38221920)
56. Rowland HM, Ihalainen E, Lindström L, Mappes J, Speed MP. 2007. Co-mimics have a mutualistic relationship despite unequal defense levels. Nature. 448:64-66.
57. Ruxton GD, Sherratt TN, Speed MP. 2004. Avoiding attack. Evolutionary ecology of crypsis, warning signals and mimicry. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 249.
58. Ruxton GD, Speed MP, Broom M. 2009. Identifying the ecological conditions that select for intermediate levels of aposematic signalling. Evol Ecol. 23:491-501.
59. Sandre S-L, Stevens M, Mappes J. 2010. The effect of predator appetite, prey warning coloration and luminance on predator foraging decisions. Behaviour. 147:1121-1143.
60. Schlenoff DH. 1984. Novelty: a basis for generalisation in prey selection. Anim Behav. 32:919-921.
61. Schuler W, Hesse E. 1985. On the function of warning coloration-a black and yellow pattern inhibits prey attack by naïve domestic chicks. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 16:245-255.
62. Sherratt TN, Beatty CD. 2003. The evolution of warning signals as reliable indicators of prey defense. Am Nat. 162:377-389. (Pubitemid 37425180)
63. Sherratt TN, Speed MP, Ruxton GD. 2004. Natural selection on unpalatable species imposed by state-dependent foraging behavior. J Theor Biol. 228:217-226. (Pubitemid 38496283)
64. Shettleworth SJ. 1972. The role of novelty in learned avoidance of unpalatable 'prey' by domestic chicks ("Gallus gallus"). Anim Behav. 20:29-35.
65. Siddiqi A, Cronin TW, Loew ER, Vorobyev M, Summers K. 2004. Interspecific and intraspecific views of color signals in the strawberry poison frog Dendrobates pumilio. J Exp Biol. 207:2471-2485. (Pubitemid 39009283)
66. Sillén-Tullberg B. 1985. Higher survival of an aposematic than of a cryptic form of a distasteful bug. Oecologia. 67:411-415. (Pubitemid 17245968)
67. Smith SM. 1975. Innate recognition of coral snake pattern by a possible avian predator. Science. 187:759-760.
68. Stevens M. 2007. Predator perception and the interrelation between different forms of protective coloration. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 274: 1457-1464. (Pubitemid 47056666)
69. Stevens M, Cantor A, Graham J, Winney IS. 2009. The function of animal 'eyespots': conspicuousness but not eye mimicry is key. Curr Zool. 55:319-326.
70. Terrick TD, Mumme RL, Burghardt GD. 1995. Aposematic coloration enhances chemosensory recognition of noxious prey in the garter snake "Thamnophis radix". Anim Behav. 49:857-866.
71. Thomas RJ, Marples NM, Cuthill IC, Takahashi M, Gibson EA. 2003. Dietary conservatism may facilitate the initial evolution of aposematism. Oikos. 101:458-466. (Pubitemid 36599465)
72. Tullberg BS, Merilaita S, Wiklund C. 2005. Aposematism and crypsis combined as a result of distance dependence: functional versatility of the colour pattern in the swallowtail butterfly larva. Proc R Soc B. 272:1315-1321. (Pubitemid 41414712)
73. Vorobyev M, Osorio D. 1998. Receptor noise as a determinant of color thresholds. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 265:315-358.
74. Vorobyev M, Osorio D, Bennett ATD, Marshall NJ, Cuthill IC. 1998. Tetrachromacy, oil droplets and bird plumage colors. J Comp Physiol A. 183:621-633. (Pubitemid 28554072)
75. Yosef R, Whitman DW. 1992. Predator exaptations and defensive adaptations in evolutionary balance: no defense is perfect. Evol Ecol. 6: 527-536.