Pollinators can prefer rewarding models to mimics: consequences for the assumptions of Batesian floral mimicry

Jager, Marinus de; Newman, Ethan; Theron, G.B.; Botha, Pieter Willem; Barton, Madeleine; Anderson, Bruce

doi:10.1007/s00606-015-1276-0

Cited by 15 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A basic, but not absolute, requirement of Batesian mimicry is that the mimic should occur at a lower frequency than that of its model (Joron & Mallet ; Wong & Schiestl ; Anderson & Johnson ; de Jager et al . ). This should maximise encounters of operators with models and thus enhance operator behaviour that is favourable to the mimic (Jiggins et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Effects of distance from models on the fitness of floral mimics

Duffy

Johnson

2017

Plant Biol J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rewardless plants can attract pollinators by mimicking floral traits of rewarding heterospecific plants. This should result in the pollination success of floral mimics being dependent on the relative abundance of their models, as pollinator abundance and conditioning on model signals should be higher in the vicinity of the models. However, the attraction of pollinators to signals of the models may be partially innate, such that spatial isolation of mimics from model species may not strongly affect pollination success of mimics. We tested whether pollination rates and fruit set of the rewardless orchid Disa pulchra were influenced by proximity and abundance of its rewarding model species, Watsonia lepida. Pollination success of the orchid increased with proximity to the model species, while fruit set of the orchid increased with local abundance of the model species. Orchids that were experimentally translocated outside the model population experienced reduced pollinaria removal and increased pollinator-mediated self-pollination. These results confirm predictions that the pollination success of floral mimics should be dependent on the proximity and abundance of model taxa, and thus highlight the importance of ecological facilitation among species involved in mimicry systems.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Effects of distance from models on the fitness of floral mimics

Duffy

Johnson

2017

Plant Biol J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although such receiver‐mediated selection can produce very precise mimicry, as in the visual mimicry (wing colouration—Llaurens et al, ) and locomotory mimicry (wing‐beat frequency—Srygley, ) of Heliconius butterflies, there are cases where mimicry appears incomplete (Penney, Hassall, Skevington, Abbott, & Sherratt, ; Ruxton, Sherratt, & Speed, ; Thurman & Seymoure, ). Nonetheless, when approximate resemblance to a model is functional, receivers will still exert selection on mimics to maintain existing resemblances (de Jager, Newman, Theron, Botha, & Anderson, ; Kikuchi & Pfennig, ).…”

Section: Confirming Mimicrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the broadest level, mimics may exhibit a divergent phenotype to their closest non‐mimetic relatives due to receiver‐mediated divergent selection (Figure a). This can be expected when the model is distantly related to the mimic, resulting in a relatively distinct mimetic phenotype (Feeney et al, ; de Jager et al, ; Johnson et al, ; Llaurens et al, ).…”

Section: Detecting Receiver‐mediated Selection On Mimicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Discrimination thresholds can illustrate when colours are indistinguishable, as demonstrated in hymenopteran receivers that are unable to discriminate the colours of rewarding flowers from their nectarless floral mimics (de Jager & Peakall, ; Peter & Johnson, ). Similar advances in lepidopteran, dipteran and avian vision modelling have allowed exploration of mimetic colours as perceived by receivers spanning various taxa (de Jager et al, ; Spottiswoode & Stevens, ; Stoddard, ; Théry & Casas, ; Whitehead et al, ).…”

Section: What Do Mimics Need To Resemble To Gain Fitness Benefit?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

When is resemblance mimicry?

Jager

Anderson

2019

Functional Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mimetic resemblance is extensive across the tree of life yet agreeing on what constitutes mimicry is challenging. One of the reasons for disagreement is a lack of unambiguous criteria to resolve whether a case of resemblance is a product of mimicry or alternative processes. Mimicry occurs when an organism takes advantage of the perception and association that a receiver has with a model to gain adaptive benefits. Three conditions should be fulfilled to confirm mimicry: (1) characterising a model, (2) identifying a receiver with a percept of said model and (3) demonstrating that the receiver exerts selection on the mimic. We suggest multiple lines of evidence, both experimental and correlative, to support each condition. These conditions help separate similarity due to crypsis and perceptual bias from mimetic resemblance. Furthermore, we explore forms of receiver‐mediated selection on the mimic, what mimics need to resemble for successful mimicry to occur, and the evolution of imperfect mimicry. We hope this perspective provides a functional pathway for biologists to confirm the existence of mimicry and serve as a guide for studying mimetic interactions across disciplines. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

show abstract

“…The biological cost the pollinator incurs by visiting a deceiving plant depends on the time an energy it invests in finding and visiting the plant. Costs typically involve a missed feeding opportunity for the pollinator, such as in food deceptive orchids [16]. One of the few studies investigating the negative effects of sexual deception on a pollinating species proposed that the interaction might reduce fitness of the mimicked female insects as they receive less attention from male suitors when in the presence of deceptive flowers [31].…”

Section: The Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deceptive pollination and insects’ learning: a delicate balance

Vázquez

Barradas

2017

Journal of Biological Dynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we propose and discuss a simple two-dimensional model describing the interaction between two species: a plant population that gets pollinated by an insect population. The plants attract the insects deceiving them and not delivering any reward. We are interested in analysing the effect of learning by the insect population due to unsuccessfully visiting the deceiving plants. We are especially interested in three elements: conditions for the simultaneous coexistence of both species, their extinction as a function of the biological cost of the deceptiveness for the pollinator, and the appearance of oscillations in the dynamics. We also look for conditions under which plants would be better off by switching to different strategies, in particular, we look for conditions for the existence and stability of the equilibria of the corresponding differential equations system, and the conditions for the existence of periodic solutions.

show abstract

Pollinators can prefer rewarding models to mimics: consequences for the assumptions of Batesian floral mimicry

Cited by 15 publications

References 47 publications

Effects of distance from models on the fitness of floral mimics

Effects of distance from models on the fitness of floral mimics

When is resemblance mimicry?

Deceptive pollination and insects’ learning: a delicate balance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About