Literature DB >> 25964333

Body size affects the evolution of eyespots in caterpillars.

Thomas John Hossie1, John Skelhorn2, Jesse W Breinholt3, Akito Y Kawahara3, Thomas N Sherratt4.   

Abstract

Many caterpillars have conspicuous eye-like markings, called eyespots. Despite recent work demonstrating the efficacy of eyespots in deterring predator attack, a fundamental question remains: Given their protective benefits, why have eyespots not evolved in more caterpillars? Using a phylogenetically controlled analysis of hawkmoth caterpillars, we show that eyespots are associated with large body size. This relationship could arise because (i) large prey are innately conspicuous; (ii) large prey are more profitable, and thus face stronger selection to evolve such defenses; and/or (iii) eyespots are more effective on large-bodied prey. To evaluate these hypotheses, we exposed small and large caterpillar models with and without eyespots in a 2 × 2 factorial design to avian predators in the field. Overall, eyespots increased prey mortality, but the effect was particularly marked in small prey, and eyespots decreased mortality of large prey in some microhabitats. We then exposed artificial prey to naïve domestic chicks in a laboratory setting following a 2 × 3 design (small or large size × no, small, or large eyespots). Predators attacked small prey with eyespots more quickly, but were more wary of large caterpillars with large eyespots than those without eyespots or with small eyespots. Taken together, these data suggest that eyespots are effective deterrents only when both prey and eyespots are large, and that innate aversion toward eyespots is conditional. We conclude that the distribution of eyespots in nature likely results from selection against eyespots in small caterpillars and selection for eyespots in large caterpillars (at least in some microhabitats).

Keywords:  Lepidoptera; antipredator defense; caterpillars; mimicry; predator-prey

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25964333      PMCID: PMC4450435          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1415121112

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  20 in total

1.  The evolution of body armor in mammals: plantigrade constraints of large body size.

Authors:  B G Lovegrove
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 3.694

2.  Theoretical genetics of Batesian mimicry I. single-locus models.

Authors:  D Charlesworth; B Charlesworth
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  1975-12       Impact factor: 2.691

3.  Correlated evolution of conspicuous coloration and body size in poison frogs (Dendrobatidae).

Authors:  Mattias Hagman; Anders Forsman
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 3.694

4.  A comparative analysis of the evolution of imperfect mimicry.

Authors:  Heather D Penney; Christopher Hassall; Jeffrey H Skevington; Kevin R Abbott; Thomas N Sherratt
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  A tropical horde of counterfeit predator eyes.

Authors:  Daniel H Janzen; Winnie Hallwachs; John M Burns
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-06-14       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Imperfect Batesian mimicry and the conspicuousness costs of mimetic resemblance.

Authors:  Michael P Speed; Graeme D Ruxton
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.926

Review 7.  The role of eyespots as anti-predator mechanisms, principally demonstrated in the Lepidoptera.

Authors:  Martin Stevens
Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc       Date:  2005-11

8.  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

9.  Density-dependent predation influences the evolution and behavior of masquerading prey.

Authors:  John Skelhorn; Hannah M Rowland; Jon Delf; Michael P Speed; Graeme D Ruxton
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-04-04       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Predator mimicry, not conspicuousness, explains the efficacy of butterfly eyespots.

Authors:  Sebastiano De Bona; Janne K Valkonen; Andrés López-Sepulcre; Johanna Mappes
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-05-07       Impact factor: 5.349

View more
  8 in total

1.  Preys' exploitation of predators' fear: when the caterpillar plays the Gruffalo.

Authors:  Sergio Castellano; Paolo Cermelli
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-12-07       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 2.  Interspecific visual signalling in animals and plants: a functional classification.

Authors:  Tim Caro; William L Allen
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Body size affects the evolution of hidden colour signals in moths.

Authors:  Changku Kang; Reza Zahiri; Thomas N Sherratt
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-08-30       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Body Shape and Coloration of Silkworm Larvae Are Influenced by a Novel Cuticular Protein.

Authors:  Gao Xiong; Xiaoling Tong; Tingting Gai; Chunlin Li; Liang Qiao; Antónia Monteiro; Hai Hu; Minjin Han; Xin Ding; Songyuan Wu; Zhonghuai Xiang; Cheng Lu; Fangyin Dai
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2017-09-18       Impact factor: 4.562

Review 5.  Are Humans Prepared to Detect, Fear, and Avoid Snakes? The Mismatch Between Laboratory and Ecological Evidence.

Authors:  Carlos M Coelho; Panrapee Suttiwan; Abul M Faiz; Fernando Ferreira-Santos; Andras N Zsido
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2019-09-11

6.  The effectiveness of eyespots and masquerade in protecting artificial prey across ontogenetic and seasonal shifts.

Authors:  Elizabeth G Postema
Journal:  Curr Zool       Date:  2021-10-04       Impact factor: 2.734

7.  Are behavioral responses to eyespots in sticklebacks influenced by the visual environment? An experimental examination.

Authors:  Evelina Juntorp; Madicken Åkerman; John L Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 3.167

8.  High niche diversity in Mesozoic pollinating lacewings.

Authors:  Qing Liu; Xiumei Lu; Qingqing Zhang; Jun Chen; Xiaoting Zheng; Weiwei Zhang; Xingyue Liu; Bo Wang
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2018-09-17       Impact factor: 14.919

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.