Pattern variation is linked to anti-predator coloration in butterfly larvae

被引:0
|
作者
McLellan, Callum F. [1 ]
Cuthill, Innes C. [1 ]
Montgomery, Stephen H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bristol, Sch Biol Sci, 24 Tyndall Ave, Bristol BS8 1TQ, England
基金
英国生物技术与生命科学研究理事会; 英国自然环境研究理事会;
关键词
patterning; aposematism; crypsis; camouflage; defensive coloration; gregariousness; DISRUPTIVE COLORATION; WARNING COLORATION; RECOGNITION ERRORS; SPATIAL-FREQUENCY; EVOLUTION; CONTRAST; SIGNAL; PREY; GREGARIOUSNESS; DETECTABILITY;
D O I
10.1098/rspb.2023.0811
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Prey animals typically try to avoid being detected and/or advertise to would-be predators that they should be avoided. Both anti-predator strategies primarily rely on colour to succeed, but the specific patterning used is also important. While the role of patterning in camouflage is relatively clear, the design features of aposematic patterns are less well understood. Here, we use a comparative approach to investigate how pattern use varies across a phylogeny of 268 species of cryptic and aposematic butterfly larvae, which also vary in social behaviour. We find that longitudinal stripes are used more frequently by cryptic larvae, and that patterns putatively linked to crypsis are more likely to be used by solitary larvae. By contrast, aposematic larvae are more likely to use horizontal bands and spots, but we find no differences in the use of individual pattern elements between solitary and gregarious aposematic species. However, solitary aposematic larvae are more likely to display multiple pattern elements, whereas those with no pattern are more likely to be gregarious. Our study advances our understanding of how pattern variation, coloration and social behaviour covary across lepidopteran larvae, and highlights new questions about how patterning affects larval detectability and predator responses to aposematic prey.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Anti-predator behavior of gelada baboons
    Iwamoto, T
    Mori, A
    Kawai, M
    Bekele, A
    [J]. PRIMATES, 1996, 37 (04) : 389 - 397
  • [22] FLOCKING AS AN ANTI-PREDATOR STRATEGY IN DOVES
    SIEGFRIED, WR
    UNDERHILL, LG
    [J]. ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR, 1975, 23 (AUG) : 504 - 508
  • [23] Unpredictable movement as an anti-predator strategy
    Richardson, Graham
    Dickinson, Patrick
    Burman, Oliver H. P.
    Pike, Thomas W.
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY B-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2018, 285 (1885)
  • [24] Fossils in Myanmar amber demonstrate the diversity of anti-predator strategies of Cretaceous holometabolan insect larvae
    Haug, Carolin
    Haug, Joachim T.
    Haug, Gideon T.
    Mueller, Patrick
    Zippel, Ana
    Kiesmueller, Christine
    Gauweiler, Joshua
    Hoernig, Marie K.
    [J]. ISCIENCE, 2024, 27 (01)
  • [25] Predator exposure improves anti-predator responses in a threatened mammal
    West, Rebecca
    Letnic, Mike
    Blumstein, Daniel T.
    Moseby, Katherine E.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, 2018, 55 (01) : 147 - 156
  • [26] Reactive anti-predator behavioral strategy shaped by predator characteristics
    Palmer, Meredith S.
    Packer, Craig
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2021, 16 (08):
  • [27] Warming increases chlorpyrifos effects on predator but not anti-predator behaviours
    Dinh Van, Khuong
    Janssens, Lizanne
    Debecker, Sara
    Stoks, Robby
    [J]. AQUATIC TOXICOLOGY, 2014, 152 : 215 - 221
  • [28] Predator recognition and anti-predator responses in the rainbowfish Melanotaenia eachamensis
    Brown, C
    Warburton, K
    [J]. BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY AND SOCIOBIOLOGY, 1997, 41 (01) : 61 - 68
  • [29] The Roles of Standing Genetic Variation and Evolutionary History in Determining the Evolvability of Anti-Predator Strategies
    O'Donnell, Daniel R.
    Parigi, Abhijna
    Fish, Jordan A.
    Dworkin, Ian
    Wagner, Aaron P.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2014, 9 (06):
  • [30] Variation in anti-predator behavior among five strains of inbred guppies, Poecilia reticulata
    Bleakley, Bronwyn H.
    Martell, Christopher M.
    Brodie, Edmund D., III
    [J]. BEHAVIOR GENETICS, 2006, 36 (05) : 783 - 791