» Articles » PMID: 39473883

Detectability of a Poison Frog and Its Batesian Mimic Depends on Body Posture and Viewing Angle

Overview
Journal Behav Ecol
Date 2024 Oct 30
PMID 39473883
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Aposematic signals warn predators that prey should be avoided due to dangerous secondary defences. However, as warning signals do not always produce avoidance, warning colors may evolve as a trade-off balancing detectability against signal saliency. For Batesian mimics, which display salient signals but lack secondary defenses, the costs of predator encounters are greater, potentially increasing the benefit of crypsis. This raises the question of whether imperfect mimicry may reduce detectability while retaining mimetic efficacy. We tested this hypothesis with the poisonous frog and undefended Batesian mimic using computational visual modeling and screen-based detection trials with human participants. We found that both species incorporate camouflage into their warning colors, but to different degrees depending on viewing angle and behavior. Contrary to expectation, we found differences in detectability between model and mimic that do not adhere to the hypothesized cryptic mimetic phenotype. To aerial observers, we found the mimic to be more detectable than the model. To terrestrial observers, likely owing to the model's bright ventral color, we found the model more detectable in viewing angles that highlight the ventral coloration, whereas the mimic was more detectable in viewing angles that highlight the dorsal coloration. Consequently, we suggest that in addition to being the result of perceptual or developmental constraints, imperfect mimicry may also evolve as an adaptive strategy which balances camouflage with different signaling functions. Our findings complement the emerging view that aposematic signals may evolve in response to a multitude of selection pressures beyond aversion alone.

Citing Articles

Evolutionary Drivers of Conspicuous Spots in Velvet Ants (Hymenoptera: ).

Lopez V, Allen W, Polido M, Almeida L, Williams K, Ferreira R Ecol Evol. 2025; 15(2):e70896.

PMID: 39896766 PMC: 11782072. DOI: 10.1002/ece3.70896.

References
1.
Yeager J, Barnett J . Ultraviolet components offer minimal contrast enhancement to an aposematic signal. Ecol Evol. 2021; 10(24):13576-13582. PMC: 7771128. DOI: 10.1002/ece3.6969. View

2.
Tullberg B, Merilaita S, Wiklund C . Aposematism and crypsis combined as a result of distance dependence: functional versatility of the colour pattern in the swallowtail butterfly larva. Proc Biol Sci. 2005; 272(1570):1315-21. PMC: 1560331. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2005.3079. View

3.
Sherratt T, Peet-Pare C . The perfection of mimicry: an information approach. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2017; 372(1724). PMC: 5444061. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2016.0340. View

4.
Darst C, Cummings M, Cannatella D . A mechanism for diversity in warning signals: conspicuousness versus toxicity in poison frogs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006; 103(15):5852-7. PMC: 1458662. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0600625103. View

5.
Kikuchi D, Pfennig D . Imperfect mimicry and the limits of natural selection. Q Rev Biol. 2014; 88(4):297-315. DOI: 10.1086/673758. View