The protective value of a defensive display varies with the experience of wild predators

Abstract

Predation has driven the evolution of diverse adaptations for defence among prey, and one striking example is the deimatic display. While such displays can resemble, or indeed co-occur with, aposematic ‘warning’ signals, theory suggests deimatic displays may function independently of predator learning. The survival value of deimatic displays against wild predators has not been tested before. Here we used the mountain katydid Acripeza reticulata to test the efficacy of a putative deimatic display in the wild. Mountain katydids have a complex defence strategy; they are camouflaged at rest, but reveal a striking red-, blue-, and black-banded abdomen when attacked. We presented live katydids to sympatric (experienced) and allopatric (naive) natural predators, the Australian magpie Cracticus tibicen, and observed bird reactions and katydid behaviors and survival during repeated interactions. The efficacy of the katydids’ defence differed with predator experience. Their survival was greatest when faced with naïve predators, which provided clear evidence of the protective value of the display. In contrast, katydid survival was consistently less likely when facing experienced predators. Our results suggest that sympatric predators have learned to attack and consume mountain katydids despite their complex defense, and that their post-attack display can be an effective deterrent, particularly against naïve predators. These results suggest that deimatism does not require predator learning to afford protection, but that a predator can learn to expect the display and subsequently avoid it or ignore it. That sympatric predators learn to ignore the defense is a possible explanation for the mountain katydid’s counter-intuitive behavior of revealing warning colors only after tactile stimuli from predator attack.

Conspicuous colours reduce predation rates in fossorial uropeltid snakes

“…Startle or deimatic displays involve behaviours wherein conspicuous colours are suddenly displayed, providing prey a survival advantage (Umbers, Lehtonen & Mappes, 2015; Umbers & Mappes, 2015). Although there has been disagreement regarding what constitutes a deimatic display and how it differs from aposematism (Ruxton, Sherratt & Speed, 2004; Umbers, Lehtonen & Mappes, 2015; Umbers & Mappes, 2015, 2016; Skelhorn, Holmes & Rowe, 2016), there is general agreement that deimatism involves a momentary transient display of conspicuous signal (Ruxton, Sherratt & Speed, 2004; Olofsson et al, 2012; Umbers & Mappes, 2016) that triggers an unlearnt avoidance response in predators (Umbers et al, 2017, 2019). While uropeltid colours could also have a deimatic function, our experiments show that birds avoided uropeltid snake models that were static (pinned to the ground) and did not show any momentary display of conspicuous colourations.…”

Social learning within and across predator species reduces attacks on novel aposematic prey

“…We did not count this as consumption of the prey because birds did not taste the prey items and therefore did not receive any information about their palatability. Previous studies have also demonstrated that aposematic insects often survive an encounter with avian predators (Exnerová et al, ; Umbers et al, ; Wiklund & Järvi, ), and we assumed that picking up the prey without further handling would not ‘kill’ it. Nevertheless, handling by predators might have some fitness costs for prey.…”

Peer Review #1 of "Conspicuous colours reduce predation rates in fossorial uropeltid snakes (v0.1)"

“…Startle or deimatic displays involve behaviours wherein conspicuous colours are suddenly displayed, providing prey a survival advantage (Umbers, Lehtonen & Mappes, 2015;. Although there has been disagreement regarding what constitutes a deimatic display and how it differs from aposematism (Ruxton, Sherratt & Speed, 2004;Umbers, Lehtonen & Mappes, 2015;Skelhorn, Holmes & Rowe, 2016), there is general agreement that deimatism involves a momentary transient display of conspicuous signal (Ruxton, Sherratt & Speed, 2004;Olofsson et al, 2012;Umbers & Mappes, 2016) that triggers an unlearnt avoidance response in predators (Umbers et al, 2017(Umbers et al, , 2019. While uropeltid colours could also have a deimatic function, our experiments show that birds avoided uropeltid snake models that were static (pinned to the ground) and did not show any momentary display of conspicuous colourations.…”