A unified classification of mimetic resemblances

Abstract

The eight possible interactions of a tripartite mimicry system (model, mimic and operator) are defined in terms of positive and negative functions. Five possible states of the system are also recognized in terms of specific composition. From this an eight by five classification matrix is developed, which embraces all normally recognized mimetic situations. Each class is examined for general properties and examples. Special consideration is given to situations (Mullerian mimicry) included here, and to other systems (crypsis, deflective marks) not included, which have been treated differently elsewhere. Mimicry is defined in terms of a tripartite system of living organisms, in which a sensitive signal-receiver (the operator) misidentifies the mimic as the model. It is emphasized that the system developed here is a classification of mimetic interactions, not a classification of species. Discussion is given on some implications of the system in relation to natural selection, and the classification of ecological interactions, convergence and genetic diversity.

Competitive Mimicry: Synthesis of a Neglected Class of Mimetic Relationships

“…Several mimicry classification schemes have been proposed, but some are orthogonal and no one scheme is universally accepted over others. Vane-Wright (1976) identified the eight possible interactions between model, mimic, and receiver and crossed these with the five possible states of species composition to create 40 distinct classes of interactions that encompass every possible mimetic relationship (Fig. 1).…”

“…Vane-Wright's paper was also intended to provide a comprehensive review of how the known forms of mimicry fit into the 40 theoretical classes, but no examples of competitive mimicry were included. The various forms of competitive mimicry (see Forms of competitive mimicry) fall into 10 of the 40 classes, including seven classes that Vane-Wright (1976) had left empty for lack of examples (Fig. 1).…”

“…For example, S 1 þ S 2 indicates that model and mimic are conspecifics and the receiver is a different species. Shaded boxes are forms of mimicry for which Vane-Wright (1976) presented examples. The forms of competitive mimicry are designated by the letter labels given to each in Table 1, and some examples from the text are given; daggers mark other plausible forms of competitive mimicry.…”

School-oriented mimicry, a new type of mimicry in fishes

“…The shared colour patterns of mixed schooling cardinal fishes is a clear case of 'arithmetic mimicry', classified as 'synergic inviting mimicry' by Vane-Wright (1976), who also discussed its advantages. The generality of the cardinal fish shared pattern phenomenon is suggested by its wide distribution in other parts of the Indo-Pacific region.…”

“…School-oriented mimicry can be also classified as 'synergic inviting mimicry' (see Vane-Wright, 1976). According to this scheme, the mimic contributes to the model's survival by increasing the numbers sharing the same pattern.…”