Literature DB >> 25158931

Differential detectability of polymorphic warning signals under varying light environments.

Bibiana Rojas1, Petri Rautiala2, Johanna Mappes3.   

Abstract

The striking colour-pattern variation of some aposematic species is paradoxical because selection by predators is expected to favour signal uniformity. Although the mechanisms allowing for the maintenance of such variation are not well understood, possible explanations include both non-adaptive processes like drift and gene flow; and adaptive processes, such as an interaction between natural and sexual selection, spatial and temporal variation in selection, a link between behaviour or other fitness-related traits and phenotype, and predators' ability to generalise among different signals. Here we test whether warning-signal polymorphisms, such as that of dyeing poison frogs (Dendrobates tinctorius), could be maintained by differences in detectability among morphs. We did experiments in the wild using wax models with different aposematic colour patterns vs. cryptic ones, and examined the attack rates by wild predators over time. We also tested the detectability of different aposematic morphs by 'human predators' under different light environments. We found that cryptic frog models were attacked more than aposematic models, but there were no differences in bird attack rates towards the different aposematic morphs. However, we found that detectability of different morphs depends both on predator experience and light environment. We suggest that the interaction between differential detectability and signal efficiency among morphs in different light conditions could be a mechanism aiding to the maintenance of warning-signal polymorphisms. Our results highlight the importance of considering the light environment at which predators have their first encounters with aposematic prey for future studies on predation in the wild.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anti-predator strategies; Aposematism; Colour polymorphism; Poison frog; Treefall gap

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25158931     DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2014.08.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Processes        ISSN: 0376-6357            Impact factor:   1.777


  19 in total

1.  Colour and luminance contrasts predict the human detection of natural stimuli in complex visual environments.

Authors:  Thomas E White; Bibiana Rojas; Johanna Mappes; Petri Rautiala; Darrell J Kemp
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 3.703

2.  Toxicity and Alkaloid Profiling of the Skin of the Golfo Dulcean Poison Frog Phyllobates vittatus (Dendrobatidae).

Authors:  Francesca Protti-Sánchez; Luis Quirós-Guerrero; Víctor Vásquez; Beatriz Willink; Mariano Pacheco; Edwin León; Heike Pröhl; Federico Bolaños
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 2.626

3.  Distance-dependent defensive coloration in the poison frog Dendrobates tinctorius, Dendrobatidae.

Authors:  James B Barnett; Constantine Michalis; Nicholas E Scott-Samuel; Innes C Cuthill
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Avoidance of an aposematically coloured butterfly by wild birds in a tropical forest.

Authors:  Denise D Dell'aglio; Martin Stevens; Chris D Jiggins
Journal:  Ecol Entomol       Date:  2016-06-25       Impact factor: 2.465

5.  Colour polymorphic lures exploit innate preferences for spectral versus luminance cues in dipteran prey.

Authors:  Thomas E White; Darrell J Kemp
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2017-08-14       Impact factor: 3.260

Review 6.  Dark Matters: Challenges of Nocturnal Communication Between Plants and Animals in Delivery of Pollination Services.

Authors:  Renee M Borges
Journal:  Yale J Biol Med       Date:  2018-03-28

7.  Differential responses of avian and mammalian predators to phenotypic variation in Australian Brood Frogs.

Authors:  J P Lawrence; Michael Mahony; Brice P Noonan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-05       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Environment-dependent attack rates of cryptic and aposematic butterflies.

Authors:  Brett M Seymoure; Andrew Raymundo; Kevin J McGraw; W Owen McMillan; Ronald L Rutowski
Journal:  Curr Zool       Date:  2017-10-28       Impact factor: 2.624

9.  Response time of an avian prey to a simulated hawk attack is slower in darker conditions, but is independent of hawk colour morph.

Authors:  Carina Nebel; Petra Sumasgutner; Adrien Pajot; Arjun Amar
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 2.963

10.  Phylogeny and evolution of Müllerian mimicry in aposematic Dilophotes: evidence for advergence and size-constraints in evolution of mimetic sexual dimorphism.

Authors:  Michal Motyka; Lucie Kampova; Ladislav Bocak
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.