Cryptic differences in colour among Müllerian mimics: how can the visual capacities of predators and prey shape the evolution of wing colours?

Antagonistic interactions between predators and prey often lead to co‐evolution. In the case of toxic prey, aposematic colours act as warning signals for predators and play a protective role. Evolutionary convergence in colour patterns among toxic prey evolves due to positive density‐dependent selection and the benefits of mutual resemblance in spreading the mortality cost of educating predators over a larger prey assemblage. Comimetic species evolve highly similar colour patterns, but such convergence may interfere with intraspecific signalling and recognition in the prey community, especially for species involved in polymorphic mimicry. Using spectrophotometry measures, we investigated the variation in wing coloration among comimetic butterflies from distantly related lineages. We focused on seven morphs of the polymorphic species Heliconius numata and the seven corresponding comimetic species from the genus Melinaea. Significant differences in the yellow, orange and black patches of the wing were detected between genera. Perceptions of these cryptic differences by bird and butterfly observers were then estimated using models of animal vision based on physiological data. Our results showed that the most strikingly perceived differences were obtained for the contrast of yellow against a black background. The capacity to discriminate between comimetic genera based on this colour contrast was also evaluated to be higher for butterflies than for birds, suggesting that this variation in colour, likely undetectable to birds, might be used by butterflies for distinguishing mating partners without losing the benefits of mimicry. The evolution of wing colour in mimetic butterflies might thus be shaped by the opposite selective pressures exerted by predation and species recognition.     

Indirect effects of phytochemicals on offspring performance of Queensland fruit fly,Bactrocera tryoni (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Phytochemical lures such as methyl eugenol (ME) and cue‐lure are used in the management of Bactrocera fruit flies for monitoring and control. These lures are not just attractants, but also trigger physiological changes in males that lead to enhanced mating success. Additionally, in the cue‐lure‐responsive Bactrocera tryoni, females mated with lure‐fed males exhibit changes in fecundity, remating receptivity and longevity. While the lures show current generation effects, no research has been carried out on possible multigenerational effects, although such effects have been hypothesized within a ‘sexy‐son’ sexual selection model. In this study, we test for indirect, cross‐generational effects of lure exposure in F1offspring of B. tryoni females mated with cue‐lure‐fed, zingerone‐fed and lure‐unfed (=control) males. The F1 attributes we recorded were immature development time, immature survival, adult survival and adult male lure foraging. No significant differences were found between treatments for any of the three life‐history measurements, except that the offspring sired by zingerone‐fed males had a longer egg development time than cue‐lure and control offspring. However, indirect exposure to lures significantly enhanced the lure‐foraging ability of F1 adult males. More offspring of cue‐lure‐fed males arrived at a lure source in both large flight cages and small laboratory cages over a 2‐h period than did control males. The offspring of zingerone‐fed males were generally intermediate between cue‐lure and control offspring. This study provides the first evidence of a next generation effect of fruit fly male lures. While the results of this study support a ‘sexy‐son’ sexual selection mechanism for the evolution of lure response in Bactrocera fruit flies, our discussion urges caution in interpreting our results in this way.     

Chromatic disorders in bats: a review of pigmentation anomalies and the misuse of terms to describe them

相似文献   

Chemical discrimination among predators by lizards: Responses of three skink species to the odours of high‐ and low‐threat varanid predators

Animals must balance the benefits of predator avoidance with costs. Costs of predator avoidance, such as being forced to spend long periods inactive, should select for careful discrimination among predator species. Although prey responses to multiple predators have been well researched across many taxa, no studies have tested whether lizards discriminate among larger lizard predators. We examined the responses of three species of skink to two species of predatory goanna, one that occasionally consumes skinks, and the other a skink specialist. Three litter‐dwelling, tropical skink species, Carlia rostralis, C. rubrigularis and C. storri, were given a choice between a retreat site treated with the odour of one of the goanna species, and an odourless control. The two goanna species used for stimulus scents were: Varanus tristis, a species that consumes skinks as a major proportion of its diet, and Varanus varius, a species that consumes skinks occasionally. Both goannas are broadly sympatric with all three skink species. Carlia rostralis and C. storri both avoided the scent of V. tristis, whereas C. rubrigularis did not. However, no skink species avoided the odour of V. varius. Prey are clearly able to avoid predators based on chemical cues, and can discriminate among similar predators that pose different levels of threat.