Literature DB >> 14564501

The evolution of locomotory behavior in profitable and unprofitable simulated prey.

Thomas N Sherratt1, Arash Rashed, Christopher D Beatty.   

Abstract

Prey that are unprofitable to attack (for example, those containing noxious chemicals) frequently exhibit slower and more predictable movement than species that lack these defenses. Possible explanations for the phenomenon include a lack of selection pressure on unprofitable prey to avoid predators and active selection on unprofitable prey to advertise their noxiousness. We explicitly tested these and other hypotheses using a novel "artificial world" in which the locomotory characteristics (step size, waiting time, and angular direction) of artificial profitable and unprofitable computer-generated prey were subject to continued selection by humans over a number of generations. Unprofitable prey evolved significantly slower movement behavior than profitable prey when they were readily recognized as unprofitable, and also when they frequently survived predatory attacks. This difference arose primarily as a consequence of more intense selection on profitable prey to avoid capture. When unprofitable prey were very similar (but not identical) in morphological appearance to profitable prey, unprofitable prey evolved particularly slow movement behavior, presumably because when they were slow-moving they could be more readily recognized as being unprofitable. When unprofitable prey were constrained to move slowly, a morphologically identical profitable prey species evolved locomotor mimicry only when it had no more effective means of avoiding predation. Overall, our results provide some of the first empirical support for a number of earlier hypotheses for differences in movement between unprofitable and profitable prey and demonstrate that locomotor mimicry is not an inevitable outcome of selection even in morphologically similar prey.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14564501     DOI: 10.1007/s00442-003-1411-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oecologia        ISSN: 0029-8549            Impact factor:   3.225


  7 in total

1.  The coevolution of warning signals.

Authors:  Thomas N Sherratt
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2002-04-07       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  The evolution of warning signals as reliable indicators of prey defense.

Authors:  Thomas N Sherratt; Christopher D Beatty
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2003-10-16       Impact factor: 3.926

3.  SURVIVAL OF DISTASTEFUL INSECTS AFTER BEING ATTACKED BY NAIVE BIRDS: A REAPPRAISAL OF THE THEORY OF APOSEMATIC COLORATION EVOLVING THROUGH INDIVIDUAL SELECTION.

Authors:  Christer Wiklund; Torbjörn Järvi
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  1982-09       Impact factor: 3.694

4.  Flight morphology of Neotropical butterflies: palatability and distribution of mass to the thorax and abdomen.

Authors:  Robert B Srygley; Peng Chai
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 3.225

5.  Slow movement increases the survivorship of a chemically defended grasshopper in predatory encounters.

Authors:  John D Hatle; Sarah Grimké Faragher
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Sound improves visual discrimination learning in avian predators.

Authors:  Candy Rowe
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2002-07-07       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  Similarity in flight behaviour between the honeybee Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: apidae) and its presumed mimic, the dronefly Eristalis tenax (Diptera: syrphidae).

Authors:  Y C Golding; A R Ennos; M Edmunds
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 3.312

  7 in total
  8 in total

1.  The aerodynamic costs of warning signals in palatable mimetic butterflies and their distasteful models.

Authors:  Robert B Srygley
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2004-03-22       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Do unprofitable prey evolve traits that profitable prey find difficult to exploit?

Authors:  Thomas N Sherratt; Daniel W Franks
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2005-11-22       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Dazzle coloration and prey movement.

Authors:  Martin Stevens; Daniella H Yule; Graeme D Ruxton
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2008-11-22       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Behavioural mimicry in flight path of Batesian intraspecific polymorphic butterfly Papilio polytes.

Authors:  Tasuku Kitamura; Michio Imafuku
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-06-22       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  How do predators generalize warning signals in simple and complex prey communities? Insights from a videogame.

Authors:  Mónica Arias; John W Davey; Simon Martin; Chris Jiggins; Nicola Nadeau; Mathieu Joron; Violaine Llaurens
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Fearless distasteful butterflies and timid mimetic butterflies: comparison of flight initiation distances in Papilioninae.

Authors:  Wataru Kojima
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2022-05-11       Impact factor: 3.812

7.  Contrast, contours and the confusion effect in dazzle camouflage.

Authors:  Benedict G Hogan; Nicholas E Scott-Samuel; Innes C Cuthill
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2016-07-06       Impact factor: 2.963

8.  Mimicry in motion and morphology: do information limitation, trade-offs or compensation relax selection for mimetic accuracy?

Authors:  Donald James McLean; Marie E Herberstein
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 5.349

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.