Cargando…

Does spatial variation in predation pressure modulate selection for aposematism?

It is widely believed that aposematic signals should be conspicuous, but in nature, they vary from highly conspicuous to near cryptic. Current theory, including the honest signal or trade‐off hypotheses of the toxicity–conspicuousness relationship, cannot explain why adequately toxic species vary su...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aluthwattha, S. Tharanga, Harrison, Rhett D., Ranawana, Kithsiri B., Xu, Cheng, Lai, Ren, Chen, Jin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5606884/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28944039
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3221
_version_ 1783265201173299200
author Aluthwattha, S. Tharanga
Harrison, Rhett D.
Ranawana, Kithsiri B.
Xu, Cheng
Lai, Ren
Chen, Jin
author_facet Aluthwattha, S. Tharanga
Harrison, Rhett D.
Ranawana, Kithsiri B.
Xu, Cheng
Lai, Ren
Chen, Jin
author_sort Aluthwattha, S. Tharanga
collection PubMed
description It is widely believed that aposematic signals should be conspicuous, but in nature, they vary from highly conspicuous to near cryptic. Current theory, including the honest signal or trade‐off hypotheses of the toxicity–conspicuousness relationship, cannot explain why adequately toxic species vary substantially in their conspicuousness. Through a study of similarly toxic Danainae (Nymphalidae) butterflies and their mimics that vary remarkably in their conspicuousness, we show that the benefits of conspicuousness vary along a gradient of predation pressure. Highly conspicuous butterflies experienced lower avian attack rates when background predation pressure was low, but attack rates increased rapidly as background predation pressure increased. Conversely, the least conspicuous butterflies experienced higher attack rates at low predation pressures, but at high predation pressures, they appeared to benefit from crypsis. Attack rates of intermediately conspicuous butterflies remained moderate and constant along the predation pressure gradient. Mimics had a similar pattern but higher attack rates than their models and mimics tended to imitate the signal of less attacked model species along the predation pressure gradient. Predation pressure modulated signal fitness provides a possible mechanism for the maintenance of variation in conspicuousness of aposematic signals, as well as the initial survival of conspicuous signals in cryptic populations in the process of aposematic signal evolution, and an alternative explanation for the evolutionary gain and loss of mimicry.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5606884
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56068842017-09-24 Does spatial variation in predation pressure modulate selection for aposematism? Aluthwattha, S. Tharanga Harrison, Rhett D. Ranawana, Kithsiri B. Xu, Cheng Lai, Ren Chen, Jin Ecol Evol Original Research It is widely believed that aposematic signals should be conspicuous, but in nature, they vary from highly conspicuous to near cryptic. Current theory, including the honest signal or trade‐off hypotheses of the toxicity–conspicuousness relationship, cannot explain why adequately toxic species vary substantially in their conspicuousness. Through a study of similarly toxic Danainae (Nymphalidae) butterflies and their mimics that vary remarkably in their conspicuousness, we show that the benefits of conspicuousness vary along a gradient of predation pressure. Highly conspicuous butterflies experienced lower avian attack rates when background predation pressure was low, but attack rates increased rapidly as background predation pressure increased. Conversely, the least conspicuous butterflies experienced higher attack rates at low predation pressures, but at high predation pressures, they appeared to benefit from crypsis. Attack rates of intermediately conspicuous butterflies remained moderate and constant along the predation pressure gradient. Mimics had a similar pattern but higher attack rates than their models and mimics tended to imitate the signal of less attacked model species along the predation pressure gradient. Predation pressure modulated signal fitness provides a possible mechanism for the maintenance of variation in conspicuousness of aposematic signals, as well as the initial survival of conspicuous signals in cryptic populations in the process of aposematic signal evolution, and an alternative explanation for the evolutionary gain and loss of mimicry. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-08-15 /pmc/articles/PMC5606884/ /pubmed/28944039 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3221 Text en © 2017 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Aluthwattha, S. Tharanga
Harrison, Rhett D.
Ranawana, Kithsiri B.
Xu, Cheng
Lai, Ren
Chen, Jin
Does spatial variation in predation pressure modulate selection for aposematism?
title Does spatial variation in predation pressure modulate selection for aposematism?
title_full Does spatial variation in predation pressure modulate selection for aposematism?
title_fullStr Does spatial variation in predation pressure modulate selection for aposematism?
title_full_unstemmed Does spatial variation in predation pressure modulate selection for aposematism?
title_short Does spatial variation in predation pressure modulate selection for aposematism?
title_sort does spatial variation in predation pressure modulate selection for aposematism?
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5606884/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28944039
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3221
work_keys_str_mv AT aluthwatthastharanga doesspatialvariationinpredationpressuremodulateselectionforaposematism
AT harrisonrhettd doesspatialvariationinpredationpressuremodulateselectionforaposematism
AT ranawanakithsirib doesspatialvariationinpredationpressuremodulateselectionforaposematism
AT xucheng doesspatialvariationinpredationpressuremodulateselectionforaposematism
AT lairen doesspatialvariationinpredationpressuremodulateselectionforaposematism
AT chenjin doesspatialvariationinpredationpressuremodulateselectionforaposematism