Antipredatory function of head shape for vipers and their mimics

Most research into the adaptive significance of warning signals has focused on the colouration and patterns of prey animals. However, behaviour, odour and body shape can also have signal functions and thereby reduce predators' willingness to attack defended prey. European vipers all have a distinctive triangular head shape; and they are all venomous. Several non-venomous snakes, including the subfamily Natricinae, commonly flatten their heads (also known as head triangulation) when disturbed. The adaptive significance of this potential behavioural mimicry has never been investigated.We experimentally tested if the triangular head shape typical of vipers offers protection against predation. We compared the predation pressure of free-ranging predators on artificial snakes with triangular-shaped heads against the pressure on replicas with narrow heads. Snakes of both head types had either zigzag patterned bodies, typical of European vipers, or plain (patternless) bodies. Plain snakes with narrower Colubrid-like heads suffered significantly higher predation by raptors than snakes with triangular-shaped heads. Head shape did not, however, have an additive effect on survival in zigzag-patterned snakes, suggesting that species which differ from vipers in colouration and pattern would benefit most from behavioural mimicry. Our results demonstrate that the triangular head shape typical of vipers can act as a warning signal to predators. We suggest that head-shape mimicry may be a more common phenomenon among more diverse taxa than is currently recognised.     

Conditions for the spread of conspicuous warning signals: a numerical model with novel insights

The initial evolution of conspicuous warning signals presents an evolutionary problem because selection against rare conspicuous signals is presumed to be strong, and new signals are rare when they first arise. Several possible solutions have been offered to solve this apparent evolutionary paradox, but disagreement persists over the plausibility of some of the proposed mechanisms. In this paper, we construct a deterministic numerical simulation model that allows us to derive the strength of selection on novel warning signals in a wide range of biologically relevant situations. We study the effects of predator psychology (learning, rate of mistaken attacks, and neophobia) on selection. We also study the how prey escape, predation intensity, number of predators, and abundance of different prey types affects selection. The model provides several important results. Selection on novel warning signals is number rather than frequency dependent. In most cases, there exists a threshold number of aposematic individuals below which aposematism is selected against and above which aposematism is selected for. Signal conspicuousness (which increases detection rate) and distinctiveness (which allows predator to distinguish defended from nondefended prey) have opposing effects on evolution of warning signals. A more conspicuous warning signal cannot evolve unless it makes the prey more distinctive from palatable prey, reducing mistaken attacks by predators. A novel warning signal that is learned quickly can spread from lower abundance more easily than a signal that is learned more slowly. However, the relative rate at which the resident signal and the novel signal are learned is irrelevant for the spread of the novel signal. Long-lasting neophobia can facilitate the spread of novel warning signals. Individual selection via the ability of defended prey to escape from predator is not likely to facilitate evolution of conspicuous warning signals if both the resident (cryptic) morph and the novel morph have the same escape probability. Predation intensity (defined as the proportion of palatable prey eaten by the predator) has a strong effect on selection. More intense predation results in strong selection against rare signals, but also strong selective advantage to common signals. The threshold number of aposematic individuals is lower when predation is intense. Thus, the evolution of warning signals may be more likely in environments where predation is intense. The effect of numbers of predators depends on whether predation intensity also changes. When predation intensity is constant, increasing numbers of predators raises the threshold number of aposematic individuals, and thus makes evolution of aposematism more difficult. If predation intensity increases in parallel with number of predators, the threshold number of aposematic individuals does not change much, but selection becomes more intense on both sides of the threshold.     

Poison frog colors are honest signals of toxicity, particularly for bird predators

Antipredator defenses and warning signals typically evolve in concert. However, the extensive variation across taxa in both these components of predator deterrence and the relationship between them are poorly understood. Here we test whether there is a predictive relationship between visual conspicuousness and toxicity levels across 10 populations of the color-polymorphic strawberry poison frog, Dendrobates pumilio. Using a mouse-based toxicity assay, we find extreme variation in toxicity between frog populations. This variation is significantly positively correlated with frog coloration brightness, a viewer-independent measure of visual conspicuousness (i.e., total reflectance flux). We also examine conspicuousness from the view of three potential predator taxa, as well as conspecific frogs, using taxon-specific visual detection models and three natural background substrates. We find very strong positive relationships between frog toxicity and conspicuousness for bird-specific perceptual models. Weaker but still positive correlations are found for crab and D. pumilio conspecific visual perception, while frog coloration as viewed by snakes is not related to toxicity. These results suggest that poison frog colors can be honest signals of prey unpalatability to predators and that birds in particular may exert selection on aposematic signal design.     

Investigating Müllerian mimicry: predator learning and variation in prey defences

Inexperienced predators are assumed to select for similarity of warning signals in aposematic species (Müllerian mimicry) when learning to avoid them. Recent theoretical work predicts that if co-mimic species have unequal defences, predators attack them according to their average unpalatability and mimicry may not be beneficial for the better defended co-mimic. In this study, we tested in a laboratory environment whether a uniform warning signal is superior to a variable one in promoting predator learning, and simultaneously whether co-mimics are preyed upon according to their average unpalatability. There was an interaction of signal variation and unpalatability but inexperienced birds did not select for signal similarity in artificial prey; when the prey was moderately defended a variable signal was even learnt faster than a uniform one. Due to slow avoidance learning, moderately defended prey had higher mortality than highly defended prey (although this was not straightforward), but mixing high and moderate unpalatability did not increase predation compared with high unpalatability. This does not support the view that predators are sensitive to varying unpalatability. The results suggest that inexperienced predators may neither strongly select for accurate Müllerian mimicry nor affect the benefits of mimicry when the co-mimics are unequally defended.     

The coevolution of warning signals

It has long been recognized that defended prey tend to be conspicuous. Current theories suggest that the association ('aposematism') has arisen because predators more readily learn to avoid attacking defended phenotypes when they are conspicuous. In this paper, I consider why such psychology has evolved. In particular, I argue that aposematism may have evolved not because of an independent and pre-existing receiver bias, but because the conspicuousness of a prey item provides a reliable indicator of its likelihood of being defended. To develop my case I consider how warning signals might coevolve in a system containing a number of predators, whose foraging behaviour is also subject to selection. In these cases, models readily show that the greater the conspicuousness of a novel prey item, the more likely that it has been encountered by other predators and survived. As a consequence, naive predators should be less likely to attack highly conspicuous novel prey on encounter, or at least more inclined to attack them cautiously. This adaptive predator behaviour will greatly facilitate the spread of aposematic phenotypes from extreme rarity, which in turn will enhance selection for forms of predator behaviour under which aposematism will coevolve even more readily.     

Aposematic coloration, luminance contrast, and the benefits of conspicuousness

Many organisms use warning, or aposematic, coloration to signaltheir unprofitability to potential predators. Aposematicallycolored prey are highly visually conspicuous. There is considerableempirical support that conspicuousness promotes the effectivenessof the aposematic signal. From these experiments, it is welldocumented that conspicuous, unprofitable prey are detectedsooner and aversion learned faster by the predator as comparedwith cryptic, unprofitable prey. Predators also retain memoryof the aversion longer when prey is conspicuous. The presentstudy focused on the elements of conspicuousness that conferthese benefits of aposematic coloration. Drawing on currentunderstanding of animal vision, we distinguish 2 features ofwarning coloration: high chromatic contrast and high brightness,or luminance, contrast. Previous investigations on aposematicsignal efficacy have focused mainly on the role of high chromaticcontrast between prey and background, whereas little researchhas investigated the role of high luminance contrast. Usingthe Chinese mantid as a model predator and gray-painted milkweedbugs as model prey, we found that increased prey luminance contrastincreased detection of prey, facilitated predator aversion learning,and increased predator memory retention of the aversive response.Our results suggest that the luminance contrast component ofaposematic coloration can be an effective warning signal betweenthe prey and predator. Thus, warning coloration can even evolveas an effective signal to color blind predators.     

Does spatial variation in predation pressure modulate selection for aposematism?

It is widely believed that aposematic signals should be conspicuous, but in nature, they vary from highly conspicuous to near cryptic. Current theory, including the honest signal or trade‐off hypotheses of the toxicity–conspicuousness relationship, cannot explain why adequately toxic species vary substantially in their conspicuousness. Through a study of similarly toxic Danainae (Nymphalidae) butterflies and their mimics that vary remarkably in their conspicuousness, we show that the benefits of conspicuousness vary along a gradient of predation pressure. Highly conspicuous butterflies experienced lower avian attack rates when background predation pressure was low, but attack rates increased rapidly as background predation pressure increased. Conversely, the least conspicuous butterflies experienced higher attack rates at low predation pressures, but at high predation pressures, they appeared to benefit from crypsis. Attack rates of intermediately conspicuous butterflies remained moderate and constant along the predation pressure gradient. Mimics had a similar pattern but higher attack rates than their models and mimics tended to imitate the signal of less attacked model species along the predation pressure gradient. Predation pressure modulated signal fitness provides a possible mechanism for the maintenance of variation in conspicuousness of aposematic signals, as well as the initial survival of conspicuous signals in cryptic populations in the process of aposematic signal evolution, and an alternative explanation for the evolutionary gain and loss of mimicry.     

Warning signals and predator-prey coevolution

Theories of the evolution of warning signals are typically expressed using analytic and computational models, most of which attribute aspects of predator psychology as the key factors facilitating the evolution of warning signals. Sherratt provides a novel and promising perspective with a model that considers the coevolution of predator and prey populations, showing how predators may develop a bias towards attacking cryptic prey in preference to conspicuous prey. Here, we replicate the model as an individual-based simulation and find, in accordance with Sherratt, that predators evolve a bias towards attacking cryptic prey. We then use a Monte Carlo simulation to calculate the relative survivorships of cryptic and conspicuous prey and stress that, as it stands, the model does not predict the evolution or stability of warning signals. We extend the model by giving predators continuous attack strategies and by allowing the evolution of prey conspicuousness: results are robust to the first modification but, in all cases, cryptic prey always enjoy a higher survivorship than conspicuous prey. When conspicuousness is allowed to evolve, prey quickly evolve towards crypsis, even when runaway coevolution is enabled. Sherratt's approach is promising, but other aspects of predator psychology, besides their innate response, remain vital to our understanding of warning signals.     

Antagonistic evolution in an aposematic predator–prey signaling system

Warning signals within species, such as the bright colors of chemically defended animals, are usually considered mutualistic, monomorphic traits. Such a view is however increasingly at odds with the growing empirical literature, showing nontrivial levels of signal variation within prey populations. Key to understanding this variation, we argue, could be a recognition that toxicity levels frequently vary within populations because of environmental heterogeneity. Inequalities in defense may undermine mutualistic monomorphic signaling, causing evolutionary antagonism between loci that determine appearance of less well‐defended and better defended prey forms within species. In this article, we apply a stochastic model of evolved phenotypic plasticity to the evolution of prey signals. We show that when toxicity levels vary, then antagonistic interactions can lead to evolutionary conflict between alleles at different signaling loci, causing signal evolution, “red queen‐like” evolutionary chase, and one or more forms of signaling equilibria. A key prediction is that variation in the way that predators use information about toxicity levels in their attack behaviors profoundly affects the evolutionary characteristics of the prey signaling systems. Environmental variation is known to cause variation in many qualities that organisms signal; our approach may therefore have application to other signaling systems.     

Warning signals evolve to disengage Batesian mimics

Prey that are unprofitable to attack are typically conspicuous in appearance. Conventional theory assumes that these warning signals have evolved in response to predator receiver biases. However, such biases might be a symptom rather than a cause of warning signals. We therefore examine an alternative theory: that conspicuousness evolves in unprofitable prey to avoid confusion with profitable prey. One might wonder why unprofitable prey do not find a cryptic means to be distinct from profitable prey, reducing both their risk of confusion with profitable prey and their rate of detection by predators. Here we present the first coevolutionary model to allow for Batesian mimicry and signals with different levels of detectability. We find that unprofitable prey do indeed evolve ways of distinguishing themselves using cryptic signals, particularly when appearance traits can evolve in multiple dimensions. However, conspicuous warning signals readily evolve in unprofitable prey when there are more ways to look different from the background than to match it. Moreover, the more unprofitable the prey species, the higher its evolved conspicuousness. Our results provide strong support for the argument that unprofitable species evolve conspicuous signals to avoid confusion with profitable prey and indicate that peak shift in conspicuousness-linked traits is a major factor in its establishment.     

Decision time and prey gregariousness influence attack probability in naïve and experienced predators

Aposematic coloration often has an element of conspicuousness. One suggested benefit of conspicuousness is that it enables the prey to be detected at a greater distance, allowing a predator more time to make a correct decision about attacking it and thus reducing possible recognition errors made by predators. I conducted an experiment, with chicks, Gallus gallus domesticus, as predators on live aposematic and nonaposematic prey, to investigate the effects of decision time and signal size on predator sampling behaviour. The chicks were subjected to different degrees of competition to influence how quickly decisions had to be made. Chicks in four treatment groups, either in the presence or absence of a competing chick, were presented with either solitary prey or prey in groups. In the presence of a competitor, chicks attacked the prey more often and more quickly and needed more attacks before they started to avoid the prey. With prey in groups, chicks took longer to attack, attacked less often, learnt to avoid prey more quickly and killed fewer aposematic prey. This experiment provides evidence for the importance of time and signal size for predators' attack decisions. More time to view prey prior to attack could produce a stronger image and thus encourage avoidance learning and produce a stronger neophobic avoidance effect. Copyright 2000 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.     

Can we disentangle predator–prey interactions from species distributions at a macro‐scale? A case study with a raptor species

There is a debate on whether an influence of biotic interactions on species distributions can be reflected at macro‐scale levels. Whereas the influence of biotic interactions on spatial arrangements is beginning to be studied at local scales, similar studies at macro‐scale levels are scarce. There is no example disentangling, from other similarities with related species, the influence of predator–prey interactions on species distributions at macro‐scale levels. In this study we aimed to disentangle predator–prey interactions from species distribution data following an experimental approach including a factorial design. As a case of study we selected the short‐toed eagle because of its known specialization on certain prey reptiles. We used presence–absence data at a 100 km2 spatial resolution to extract the explanatory capacity of different environmental predictors (five abiotic and two biotic predictors) on the short‐toed eagle species distribution in peninsular Spain. Abiotic predictors were relevant climatic and topographic variables, and relevant biotic predictors were prey richness and forest density. In addition to the short‐toed eagle, we also obtained the predictor's explanatory capacities for 1) species of the same family Accipitridae (as a reference), 2) for other birds of different families (as controls) and 3) artificial species with randomly selected presences (as null models). We run 650 models to test for similarities of the short‐toed eagle, controls and null models with reference species, assessed by regressions of explanatory capacities. We found higher similarities between the short‐toed eagle and other species of the family Accipitridae than for the other two groups. Once corrected by the family effect, our analyses revealed a signal of predator–prey interaction embedded in species distribution data. This result was corroborated with additional analyses testing for differences in the concordance between the distributions of different bird categories and the distributions of either prey or non‐prey species of the short‐toed eagle. Our analyses were useful to disentangle a signal of predator–prey interactions from species distribution data at a macro‐scale. This study highlights the importance of disentangling specific features from the variation shared with a given taxonomic level.     

Why aren't warning signals everywhere? On the prevalence of aposematism and mimicry in communities

Warning signals are a striking example of natural selection present in almost every ecological community – from Nordic meadows to tropical rainforests, defended prey species and their mimics ward off potential predators before they attack. Yet despite the wide distribution of warning signals, they are relatively scarce as a proportion of the total prey available, and more so in some biomes than others. Classically, warning signals are thought to be governed by positive density-dependent selection, i.e. they succeed better when they are more common. Therefore, after surmounting this initial barrier to their evolution, it is puzzling that they remain uncommon on the scale of the community. Here, we explore factors likely to determine the prevalence of warning signals in prey assemblages. These factors include the nature of prey defences and any constraints upon them, the behavioural interactions of predators with different prey defences, the numerical responses of predators governed by movement and reproduction, the diversity and abundance of undefended alternative prey and Batesian mimics in the community, and variability in other ecological circumstances. We also discuss the macroevolution of warning signals. Our review finds that we have a basic understanding of how many species in some taxonomic groups have warning signals, but very little information on the interrelationships among population abundances across prey communities, the diversity of signal phenotypes, and prey defences. We also have detailed knowledge of how a few generalist predator species forage in artificial laboratory environments, but we know much less about how predators forage in complex natural communities with variable prey defences. We describe how empirical work to address each of these knowledge gaps can test specific hypotheses for why warning signals exhibit their particular patterns of distribution. This will help us to understand how behavioural interactions shape ecological communities.     

Warning signals, receiver psychology and predator memory

This review identifies four receiver psychology perspectives that are likely to be important in the design and evolution of warning signals. Three of these perspectives (phobia, learning and prey recognition) have been studied in detail, and I include a brief review of recent work. The fourth, a memory perspective, has received little attention and is developed here. A memory perspective asks, 'how might warning signals function to reduce forgetting of avoidances between encounters?'. To answer this question I review data from psychology literature that describe important features of animal long-term memory. These data suggest that components of warning signals may function to reduce forgetting (and therefore increase memorability) by (1) preventing forgetting of learnt prey discriminations; (2) jogging the memories of forgetful predators; and (3) biasing forgetting in favour of prey avoidance when the warning signal of a defended aposematic species is copied by an edible Batesian mimic. A combination of a learning and a memory perspective suggests that the features of aposematic prey that accelerate avoidance learning may also be the features that decelerate forgetting processes. If correct, this would have important implications for the comprehension of signal design. Finally, I suggest that the cryptic appearance of an edible prey may decelerate predator learning and accelerate predator forgetting, to the benefit of the prey. In terms of learning and memory, crypsis may be an antisignal. Copyright 2000 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.     

Paradox lost: variable colour-pattern geometry is associated with differences in movement in aposematic frogs

Aposematic signal variation is a paradox: predators are better at learning and retaining the association between conspicuousness and unprofitability when signal variation is low. Movement patterns and variable colour patterns are linked in non-aposematic species: striped patterns generate illusions of altered speed and direction when moving linearly, affecting predators'' tracking ability; blotched patterns benefit instead from unpredictable pauses and random movement. We tested whether the extensive colour-pattern variation in an aposematic frog is linked to movement, and found that individuals moving directionally and faster have more elongated patterns than individuals moving randomly and slowly. This may help explain the paradox of polymorphic aposematism: variable warning signals may reduce protection, but predator defence might still be effective if specific behaviours are tuned to specific signals. The interacting effects of behavioural and morphological traits may be a key to the evolution of warning signals.     

Predator functional response and prey survival: direct and indirect interactions affecting a marked prey population

1. Predation plays an integral role in many community interactions, with the number of predators and the rate at which they consume prey (i.e. their functional response) determining interaction strengths. Owing to the difficulty of directly observing predation events, attempts to determine the functional response of predators in natural systems are limited. Determining the forms that predator functional responses take in complex systems is important in advancing understanding of community interactions. 2. Prey survival has a direct relationship to the functional response of their predators. We employed this relationship to estimate the functional response for bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocepalus predation of Canada goose Branta canadensis nests. We compared models that incorporated eagle abundance, nest abundance and alternative prey presence to determine the form of the functional response that best predicted intra-annual variation in survival of goose nests. 3. Eagle abundance, nest abundance and the availability of alternative prey were all related to predation rates of goose nests by eagles. There was a sigmoidal relationship between predation rate and prey abundance and prey switching occurred when alternative prey was present. In addition, predation by individual eagles increased as eagle abundance increased. 4. A complex set of interactions among the three species examined in this study determined survival rates of goose nests. Results show that eagle predation had both prey- and predator-dependent components with no support for ratio dependence. In addition, indirect interactions resulting from the availability of alternative prey had an important role in mediating the rate at which eagles depredated nests. As a result, much of the within-season variation in nest survival was due to changing availability of alternative prey consumed by eagles. 5. Empirical relationships drawn from ecological theory can be directly integrated into the estimation process to determine the mechanisms responsible for variation in observed survival rates. The relationship between predator functional response and prey survival offers a flexible and robust method to advance our understanding of predator-prey interactions in many complex natural systems where prey populations are marked and regularly visited.     

Predator mixes and the conspicuousness of aposematic signals

Conspicuous warning signals of unprofitable prey are a defense against visually hunting predators. They work because predators learn to associate unprofitability with bright coloration and because strong signals are detectable and memorable. However, many species that can be considered defended are not very conspicuous; they have weak warning signals. This phenomenon has previously been ignored in models and experiments. In addition, there is significant within- and among-species variation among predators in their search behavior, in their visual, cognitive, and learning abilities, and in their resistance to defenses. In this article we explore the effects of variable predators on models that combine positive frequency-dependent, frequency-independent, and negative frequency-dependent predation and show that weak signaling of aposematic species can evolve if predators vary in their tendency to attack defended prey.     

Diversity in warning coloration: selective paradox or the norm?

Aposematic theory has historically predicted that predators should select for warning signals to converge on a single form, as a result of frequency‐dependent learning. However, widespread variation in warning signals is observed across closely related species, populations and, most problematically for evolutionary biologists, among individuals in the same population. Recent research has yielded an increased awareness of this diversity, challenging the paradigm of signal monomorphy in aposematic animals. Here we provide a comprehensive synthesis of these disparate lines of investigation, identifying within them three broad classes of explanation for variation in aposematic warning signals: genetic mechanisms, differences among predators and predator behaviour, and alternative selection pressures upon the signal. The mechanisms producing warning coloration are also important. Detailed studies of the genetic basis of warning signals in some species, most notably Heliconius butterflies, are beginning to shed light on the genetic architecture facilitating or limiting key processes such as the evolution and maintenance of polymorphisms, hybridisation, and speciation. Work on predator behaviour is changing our perception of the predator community as a single homogenous selective agent, emphasising the dynamic nature of predator–prey interactions. Predator variability in a range of factors (e.g. perceptual abilities, tolerance to chemical defences, and individual motivation), suggests that the role of predators is more complicated than previously appreciated. With complex selection regimes at work, polytypisms and polymorphisms may even occur in Müllerian mimicry systems. Meanwhile, phenotypes are often multifunctional, and thus subject to additional biotic and abiotic selection pressures. Some of these selective pressures, primarily sexual selection and thermoregulation, have received considerable attention, while others, such as disease risk and parental effects, offer promising avenues to explore. As well as reviewing the existing evidence from both empirical studies and theoretical modelling, we highlight hypotheses that could benefit from further investigation in aposematic species. Finally by collating known instances of variation in warning signals, we provide a valuable resource for understanding the taxonomic spread of diversity in aposematic signalling and with which to direct future research. A greater appreciation of the extent of variation in aposematic species, and of the selective pressures and constraints which contribute to this once‐paradoxical phenomenon, yields a new perspective for the field of aposematic signalling.     

Inferring Predator Behavior from Attack Rates on Prey-Replicas That Differ in Conspicuousness

Behavioral ecologists and evolutionary biologists have long studied how predators respond to prey items novel in color and pattern. Because a predatory response is influenced by both the predator’s ability to detect the prey and a post-detection behavioral response, variation among prey types in conspicuousness may confound inference about post-prey-detection predator behavior. That is, a relatively high attack rate on a given prey type may result primarily from enhanced conspicuousness and not predators’ direct preference for that prey. Few studies, however, account for such variation in conspicuousness. In a field experiment, we measured predation rates on clay replicas of two aposematic forms of the poison dart frog Dendrobates pumilio, one novel and one familiar, and two cryptic controls. To ask whether predators prefer or avoid a novel aposematic prey form independently of conspicuousness differences among replicas, we first modeled the visual system of a typical avian predator. Then, we used this model to estimate replica contrast against a leaf litter background to test whether variation in contrast alone could explain variation in predator attack rate. We found that absolute predation rates did not differ among color forms. Predation rates relative to conspicuousness did, however, deviate significantly from expectation, suggesting that predators do make post-detection decisions to avoid or attack a given prey type. The direction of this deviation from expectation, though, depended on assumptions we made about how avian predators discriminate objects from the visual background. Our results show that it is important to account for prey conspicuousness when investigating predator behavior and also that existing models of predator visual systems need to be refined.