| Literature DB >> 31439964 |
David W Kikuchi1, Anna Dornhaus1.
Abstract
Imperfect mimicry presents a paradox of incomplete adaptation - intuitively, closer resemblance should improve performance. Receiver psychology can often explain why mimetic signals do not always evolve to match those of their models. Here, we explored the influence of a pervasive and powerful cognitive bias where associative learning depends upon an asymmetric interaction between the cue (stimulus) and consequence (reinforcer), such as in rats, which will associate light and tone with shock, and taste with nausea, but not the converse. Can such biases alter selection for mimicry? We designed an artificial mimicry system where bees foraged on artificial flowers, so that colours could be switched between rewarding or aversive. We found that when the colour blue was paired with a sucrose reward, other cues were ignored, but not when blue was paired with aversive compounds. We also tested the hypothesis that costs of errors affect how receivers sample imperfect mimics. However, costs of errors did not affect bee visits to imperfect mimics in our study. We propose a novel hypothesis for imperfect mimicry, in which the pairing between specific cues and reinforcers allows an imperfect mimic to resemble multiple models simultaneously. Generally, our results emphasize the importance of receiver psychology for the evolution of signal complexity and specificity.Entities:
Keywords: Bombus impatiens; floral mimicry; multicomponent signal; overshadowing; prepared learning
Year: 2018 PMID: 31439964 PMCID: PMC6706088 DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2018.08.011
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anim Behav ISSN: 0003-3472 Impact factor: 2.844