Search

Despite Batesian mimicry often eliciting predator avoidance, many Batesian mimics, such as some species of hoverfly (Syrphidae), are considered to have an "imperfect" resemblance to their model. One possible explanation for the persistence of apparently imperfect mimicry is that human perceptions of mimicry are different from those of natural predators. Natural predators of hoverflies have different visual and cognitive systems from humans, and they may encounter mimics in a different way. For example, whilst humans often encounter hoverflies at rest on vegetation, or in photographs or textbooks, where they are typically viewed from above, natural predators may approach hoverflies from the side or below. To test how viewing angle affects the perception of mimicry, images of mimetic hoverflies and their models (wasps and bees) were shown from different angles in an online survey. Participants were asked to distinguish between the images of models and mimics. The results show that the viewing angle does affect perceived mimicry in some species, although it does not provide a complete explanation for the persistence of imperfect mimicry in nature. The effect is also highly species-specific. This suggests that to understand better how selection has shaped mimetic accuracy in hoverflies and other taxa, further study is required of the viewing angles that predators utilize most commonly in nature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae) provide an excellent opportunity to study the evolution of Batesian mimicry, where defenseless prey avoid predation by evolving to resemble defended "model" species. Although some hoverflies beautifully resemble their hymenopteran models, others seem to be poor mimics or are apparently nonmimetic. The reasons for this variation are still enigmatic despite decades of research. Here, we address this issue by mapping social‐wasp mimicry across the phylogeny of Holarctic hoverflies. Using the "distance transform" technique, we calculate an objective measure of the abdominal pattern similarity between 167 hoverfly species and a widespread putative model, the social wasp, Vespula germanica. We find that good wasp mimicry has evolved several times, and may have also been lost, leading to the presence of nonmimics deep within clades of good mimics. Body size was positively correlated with similarity to the model, supporting previous findings that smaller species are often poorer mimics. Additionally, univoltine species were less accurate wasp mimics than multivoltine and bivoltine species. Hence, variation in the accuracy of Batesian mimics may reflect variation in the opportunity for selection caused by differences in prey value or signal perception (influenced by body size) and phenology or generation time (influenced by voltinism). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mimicry is considered a classic example of the elaborate adaptations that natural selection can produce, yet often similarity between Batesian (harmless) mimics and their unpalatable models is far from perfect. Variation in mimetic accuracy is a puzzle, as natural selection should favour mimics that are hardest to distinguish from their models. Numerous hypotheses exist to explain the persistence of inaccurate mimics, but most have rarely or never been tested against empirical observations from wild populations. One reason for this is the difficulty in measuring pattern similarity, a key aspect of mimicry. Here, we use a recently developed method, based on the distance transform of binary images, to quantify pattern similarity both within and among species for a group of hoverflies and their hymenopteran models. This allowed us to test three key hypotheses regarding inaccurate mimicry. Firstly, we tested the prediction that selection should be more relaxed in less accurate mimics, but found that levels of phenotypic variation are similar across most hoverfly species. Secondly, we found no evidence that mimics have to compromise between accuracy to multiple model species. However, we did find that darker-coloured hoverflies are less accurate mimics, which could lead to a trade-off between mimicry and thermoregulation in temperate regions. Our results shed light on a classic problem concerning the limitations of natural selection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many putative Batesian mimics only approximately resemble their supposed models, and such "imperfect" mimics are readily distinguished from defended species by humans and other vertebrates. One explanation for the existence of imperfect mimics is that the most important predators of many mimics have very different sensory and cognitive abilities from those of a typical vertebrate. In such circumstances, selection for more accurate mimicry, as perceived by humans, may be reduced. Little is known, however, about how invertebrate predators perceive and respond to mimicry in insect prey. Here, we investigate the foraging behavior of the crab spider Synema globosum, an important predator of flower-visiting insects at our field site, which frequently encounters both Batesian mimics (hoverflies—Diptera: Syrphidae) and their models (bees and wasps—Hymenoptera). In the field, we found that spiders can distinguish among dipteran and hymenopteran prey taxa, frequently attacking some models and mimics, but avoiding others. Laboratory experiments suggest that some apparently accurate mimic taxa are more likely to be avoided when spiders have prior experience of an aversive wasp model. Avoidance by spiders of black and yellow striped artificial prey suggests visual cues play a role in prey selection, but there was no evidence that olfactory cues are used to identify dangerous or noxious species. Overall, our results provide some support for the hypothesis that invertebrate predator behavior can generate selection on visual signals in putative Batesian mimics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The information in animal colour patterns plays a key role in many ecological interactions; quantification would help us to study them, but this is problematic. Comparing patterns using human judgement is subjective and inconsistent. Traditional shape analysis is unsuitable as patterns do not usually contain conserved landmarks. Alternative statistical approaches also have weaknesses, particularly as they are generally based on summary measures that discard most or all of the spatial information in a pattern., We present a method for quantifying the similarity of a pair of patterns based on the distance transform of a binary image. The method compares the whole pattern, pixel by pixel, while being robust to small spatial variations among images., We demonstrate the utility of the distance transform method using three ecological examples. We generate a measure of mimetic accuracy between hoverflies ( Diptera: Syrphidae) and wasps ( Hymenoptera) based on abdominal pattern and show that this correlates strongly with the perception of a model predator (humans). We calculate similarity values within a group of mimetic butterflies and compare this with proposed pairings of Müllerian comimics. Finally, we characterise variation in clypeal badges of a paper wasp ( Polistes dominula) and compare this with previous measures of variation., While our results generally support the findings of existing studies that have used simpler ad hoc methods for measuring differences between patterns, our method is able to detect more subtle variation and hence reveal previously overlooked trends. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]