Eyespots divert attacks by fish

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 280, Issue 1766, 2013, Pages

  Kjernsmo, Karin ^a   Merilaita, Sami ^a  

^a ÅBO AKADEMI UNIVERSITY   (Finland)

Author keywords

Deflection; Diversion; Eyespot; Intimidation; Predation; Prey coloration

Indexed keywords

ANTIPREDATOR DEFENSE; AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT; BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS; COLOR; FUNCTIONAL ROLE; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; PREDATION; PREDATION RISK; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; TELEOST; VISION;

ANIMALIA; AVES; GASTEROSTEUS ACULEATUS; PASSERI; PASSERIFORMES;

ADAPTATION; ANIMAL; ASSOCIATION; COLOR; EVOLUTION; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDATION; SMEGMAMORPHA;

ADAPTATION, BIOLOGICAL; ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; COLOR; CUES; PREDATORY BEHAVIOR; SMEGMAMORPHA;

EID: 84894422416     PISSN: 09628452     EISSN: 14712954     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2013.1458     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Stevens M, Merilaita S. 2011 Animal camouflage function and mechanisms. In Animal camouflage: mechanisms and function (eds M Stevens, S Merilaita), pp. 1-16. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
2. Poulton EB. 1890 The colours of animals: their meaning and use especially considered in the case of insects. London, UK: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co. Ltd.
3. Blest AD. 1957 The function of eyespots in the Lepidoptera. Behaviour 11, 209-256. (doi:10.1163/ 156853956X00048)
4. Neudecker S. 1989 Eye camouflage and false eyespots: chaetodontid responses to predators. Env. Biol. Fish. 25, 143-157. (doi:10.1007/BF00002208)
5. Meadows DW. 1993 Morphological variation in eyespots of the foureye butterflyfish (Chaetodon capistratus): implications for eyespot function. Copeia 1, 235-240. (doi:10.2307/1446319)
6. Ruxton GD, Sherrat TN, Speed MP. 2004 Avoiding attack. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
7. Stevens M. 2005 The role of eyespots as antipredator mechanisms, principally demonstrated in the Lepidoptera. Biol. Rev. 80, 573-588. (doi:10. 1017/S1464793105006810)
8. Cott HB. 1940 Adaptive coloration in animals. London, UK: Methuen & Co. Ltd.
9. Blest AD. 1957 The evolution of protective displays in the Saturnioidea and Sphingidae (Lepidoptera). Behaviour 11, 257-309. (doi:10.1163/ 156853957X00146)
10. Lyytinen A, Brakefield PM, Mappes J. 2003 Significance of butterfly eyespots as an antipredator device in ground-based and aerial attacks. Oikos 100, 373-379. (doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706. 2003.11935. x)
11. Lyytinen A, Brakefield PM, Lindström L, Mappes J. 2004 Does predation maintain eyespot plasticity in Bicyclus anynana? Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 271, 279-283. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2571)
12. Vlieger L, Brakefield PM. 2007 The deflection hypothesis: eyespots on the margins of butterfly wings does not influence predation by lizards. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 92, 661-667. (doi:10.1111/j. 1095-8312.2007.00863. x)
13. Gagliano M. 2008 On the spot: the absence of predators reveals eyespot plasticity in a marine fish. Behav. Ecol. 19, 733-739. (doi:10.1093/beheco/ arn013)
14. Olofsson M, Vallin A, Jakobsson S, Wiklund C. 2010 Marginal eyespots on butterfly wings deflect bird attacks under low light intensities with UV wavelengths. PLoS ONE 5, e10798. (doi:10.1371/ journal. pone.0010798)
15. Vallin A, Dimitrova M, Kodandaramaiah U, Merilaita S. 2011 Deflective effect and the effect of prey detectability on anti-predator function of eyespots. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 65, 1629-1636. (doi:10. 1007/s00265-011-1173-7)
16. Coss RG. 1979 Delayed plasticity of an instinct: recognition and avoidance of two facing eyes by the jewel fish. Dev. Psychobiol. 12, 335-345. (doi:10. 1002/dev.420120408)
17. Vallin A, Jakobsson S, Lind J, Wiklund C. 2005 Prey survival by predator intimidation: an experimental study of peacock butterfly defence against blue tits. Proc. R. Soc. B 272, 1203-1207. (doi:10.1098/rspb. 2004.3034)
18. Janzen DH, Hallwachs W, Burns JM. 2010 A tropical horde of counterfeit predator eyes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 11 659-11 665. (doi:10.1073/pnas. 0912122107)
19. Merilaita S, Vallin A, Kodandaramaiah U, Dimitrova M, Ruuskanen S, Laaksonen T. 2011 Number of eyespots and their intimidating effect on nai{dotless}ve predators in the peacock butterfly. Behav. Ecol. 22, 1326-1331. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arr135)
20. Vallin A, Jakobsson S, Wiklund C. 2007 An eye for an eye'-on the generality of the intimidating quality of eyespots in a butterfly and a hawkmoth. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61, 1419-1424. (doi:10. 1007/s00265-007-0374-6)
21. Stevens M, Hardman CJ, Stubbins CL. 2008 Conspicuousness, not eye mimicry, makes 'eyespots' effective antipredator signals. Behav. Ecol. 19, 525-531. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arm162)
22. Kodandaramaiah U, Vallin A, Wiklund C. 2009 Fixed eyespot display in a butterfly thwarts attacking birds. Anim. Behav. 77, 1415-1419. (doi:10.1016/j. anbehav.2009.02.018)
23. Wootton RJ. 1976 The biology of the sticklebacks. London, UK: Academic Press.
24. Hart PJB, Gill AB. 1994 Evolution of foraging behaviour in the threespine stickleback. In The evolutionary biology of the threespine stickleback (eds MA Bell, SA Foster), pp. 207-239. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
25. Litvak MK, Leggett WC. 1992 Age and size-selective predation on larval fishes: the bigger-is-better hypothesis revisited. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 81, 13-24. (doi:10.3354/meps081013)
26. Ohguchi O. 1978 Experiments on selection against color oddity of water fleas by 3-spined sticklebacks. Z. Tierpsychol. 47, 254-267. (doi:10.1111/j.1439-0310.1978. tb01835. x)
27. Rowe MP, Baube CL, Loew ER, Phillips JB. 2004 Optimal mechanism for finding and selecting mates: how threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) should encode male throat colors. J. Comp. Physiol. A 190, 241-256. (doi:10.1007/ s00359-004-0493-8)
28. Giles N. 1987 Predation risk and reduced foraging activity in fish: experiments with parasitized and non-parasitized three-spined sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus. J. Fish Biol. 31, 37-44. (doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.1987. tb05212. x)
29. Godin JGJ, Sproul CD. 1988 Risk taking in parasitized sticklebacks under threat of predation: effects of energetic need and food availability. Can. J. Zool. 66, 2360-2367. (doi:10.1139/z88-350)
30. Barber I, Huntingford FA. 1995 The effect of Schistocephalus solidus (Cestoda: Pseudophyllidae) on the foraging and shoaling behaviour of threespined sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus. Behaviour 132, 1223-1240. (doi:10.1163/ 156853995X00540)
31. Rice WR. 1989 Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43, 223-225. (doi:10.2307/ 2409177)
32. R Development Core Team. 2009 R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
33. Olofsson M, Jakobsson S, Wiklund C. 2013 Bird attacks on a butterfly with marginal eyespots and the role of prey concealment against the background. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 109, 290-297. (doi:10.1111/bij.12063)
34. Robbins RK. 1981 The 'false head' hypothesis: predation and wing pattern variation of lycaenid butterflies. Am. Nat. 118, 770-775. (doi:10.1086/ 283868)
35. Kelley JL, Fitzpatrick JL, Merilaita S. 2013 Spots and stripes: ecology and colour pattern evolution in butterflyfishes. Proc. R. Soc. B 280, 20122730. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.2730)
36. Allen G, Steene R, Humann P, Deloach N. 2003 Reef fish identification tropical pacific. Jacksonville, FL: New World Publications, Inc.
37. Wourms MK, Wasserman FE. 1985 Butterfly wing markings are more advantageous during handling than during the initial strike by an avian predator. Evolution 39, 845-851. (doi:10.2307/2408684)
38. Dale G, Pappantoniou A. 1986 Eye-picking behaviour of the cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua applications to studies of eyespot mimicry. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 463, 177-178. (doi:10. 1111/j.1749-6632.1986. tb21537. x)
39. Edmunds M. 1974 Significance of beak marks on butterfly wings. Oikos 25, 117-118. (doi:10.2307/ 3543555)
40. McPhail JD. 1977 A possible function of the caudal spot in characid fishes. Can. J. Zool. 55, 1063-1066. (doi:10.1139/z77-136)
41. Vallin A, Jakobsson S, Lind J, Wiklund C. 2006 Crypsis versus intimidation-anti-predation defence in three closely related butterflies. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 59, 455-459. (doi:10.1007/s00265-005-0069-9)
42. Csányi V. 1986 Ethological analysis of predator avoidance by the paradise fish (Macropodus opercularis L.). II. Key stimuli in avoidance learning. Anim. Learn. Behav. 14, 101-109. (doi:10.3758/ BF03200044)
43. Coss RG. 1978 Development of face aversion by the jewel fish (Hemichromis bimaculatus, Gill 1862). Z. Tierpsychol. 48, 28-46. (doi:10.1111/j.1439-0310.1978. tb00246. x)
44. Kodandaramaiah U. 2011 The evolutionary significance of butterfly eyespots. Behav. Ecol. 22, 1264-1271. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arr123)
45. Blut C, Wilbrandt J, Fels D, Girlgel EI, Lunau K. 2012 The 'sparkle' in fake eyes: the protective effect of mimic eyespots in Lepidoptera. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 143, 231-244. (doi:10.1111/j.1570-7458.2012. 01260. x)
46. Olofsson M, Løvlie H, Tibblin J, Jakobsson S, Wiklund C. 2012 Eyespot display in the peacock butterfly triggers antipredator behaviours in nai{dotless}ve adult fowl. Behav. Ecol. 24, 305-310. (doi:10.1093/ beheco/ars167)
47. Olofsson M, Eriksson S, Jakobsson S, Wiklund C. 2012 Deimatic display in the european swallowtail butterfly as a secondary defence against attacks from great tits. PLoS ONE 7, e47092. (doi:10.1371/ journal. pone.0047092)
48. Motta PJ. 1983 Response by potential prey to coral reef predators. Anim. Behav. 31, 1257-1259. (doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(83)80033-5)