Literature DB >> 20410028

Predators are less likely to misclassify masquerading prey when their models are present.

John Skelhorn1, Graeme D Ruxton.   

Abstract

Masquerading animals have evolved striking visual resemblances to inanimate objects. These animals gain protection from their predators not simply by avoiding detection, but by causing their predators to misclassify them as the 'models' that they appear to resemble. Using domestic chicks as predators and twig-mimicking caterpillars as prey, we demonstrated that masquerading prey were more likely to be misclassified as their models when viewed in isolation from their models than when viewed alongside examples of their model, although they benefitted from masquerade to some extent in both conditions. From this, we predict a selection pressure on masqueraders to use microhabitats that reduce the risk of them being viewed simultaneously with examples of their model, and/or to more closely resemble their model in situations where simultaneous viewing is commonplace.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20410028      PMCID: PMC2936160          DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2010.0226

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Lett        ISSN: 1744-9561            Impact factor:   3.703


  2 in total

1.  Animal camouflage: current issues and new perspectives.

Authors:  Martin Stevens; Sami Merilaita
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-02-27       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Masquerade: camouflage without crypsis.

Authors:  John Skelhorn; Hannah M Rowland; Michael P Speed; Graeme D Ruxton
Journal:  Science       Date:  2010-01-01       Impact factor: 47.728

  2 in total
  6 in total

Review 1.  Imperfect camouflage: how to hide in a variable world?

Authors:  Anna Hughes; Eric Liggins; Martin Stevens
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2019-05-15       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 2.  How camouflage works.

Authors:  Sami Merilaita; Nicholas E Scott-Samuel; Innes C Cuthill
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 3.  Cognition and the evolution of camouflage.

Authors:  John Skelhorn; Candy Rowe
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Predator responses to prey camouflage strategies: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  João Vitor de Alcantara Viana; Camila Vieira; Rafael Campos Duarte; Gustavo Quevedo Romero
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2022-09-14       Impact factor: 5.530

5.  Masquerading as pea plants: behavioural and morphological evidence for mimicry of multiple models in an Australian orchid.

Authors:  Daniela Scaccabarozzi; Salvatore Cozzolino; Lorenzo Guzzetti; Andrea Galimberti; Lynne Milne; Kingsley W Dixon; Ryan D Phillips
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 4.357

6.  Modularity of a leaf moth-wing pattern and a versatile characteristic of the wing-pattern ground plan.

Authors:  Takao K Suzuki
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2013-07-27       Impact factor: 3.260

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.