Mimicry

Abstract

In its most general form mimicry refers to phenotypes of an organism that are adaptively modified to resemble living or nonliving components of its environments. Phenotype mimicry can be used in a number of different ways, most notably, to protect individuals against predators and other enemies. Such protective mimicry includes masquerade (copying an inanimate object in the environment), Batesian mimicry (an edible prey copies a defended prey) and Müllerian mimicry (shared warning signals between defended prey species). Phenotype mimicry may also be used aggressively, where for example, a predaceous mimic uses mimicry to hide from or to lure victims. In sexual mimicry (e.g. females look like males or vice versa), phenotype mimicry may be used to remove costs of sexual selection. In song mimicry, mimicry may be used to attract mates, to deter predation or facilitate grouping. Although mimicry is used in very diverse ways in nature, there may be similarities in the evolutionary ecology of mimetic phenotypes. A key point is that if the fitness of individual mimics increases with the number of mimics in a habitat then we may expect monomorphisms in the phenotypes; but if fitness declines as abundance increases we may anticipate the opposite.

Key Concepts:

  • Mimicry refers to phenotypes of an organism that are adaptively modified to resemble living or nonliving components of their environments.

  • The most extensively studied forms of mimicry are those used to protect prey from predators (especially mimetic resemblance of the colour patterns of a warningly coloured animal: Batesian and Müllerian mimicries).

  • In masquerade edible prey mimics inanimate objects in their environment (twigs and stones) to prevent predators noticing and attacking them.

  • Nature has found many different uses for phenotype mimicry in addition to avoidance of predation (e.g. aggressive use by predators to enable predation; by nectarless flowers to attract pollinators and by sexual mimicry and vocal mimicry).

  • Though mimicry is used in various ways there may be some common evolutionary issues; for example, how phenotype mimicry can evolve when the intermediate forms are less fit than both the original ancestral and the perfectly mimetic trait.

  • The benefits to a mimic are likely to change with the local abundance of the mimetic phenotype in a locality. Sometimes mimics benefit when there are many present (and we expect monomorphism in mimicry).

  • Often mimics lose benefits as the mimetic phenotype increases in abundance (in which case diversification of mimetic phenotypes may be expected).

  • When mimicry harms another organism we may expect counteractive measures in the form of adaptive change within an organism's lifetime (by learning) or by adaptive change across generations (coevolution).

Keywords: predation; learning; evolution; coevolution; genetics; behaviour

Figure 1.

Three edible hoverfly species, which have evolved resemblances to venomous hymenopterans to protect themselves from predation: (a) Eristalis tenax, (b) Mallota posticata and (c) Spilomyia longicornis, Photos by Chriss Hassall.

Figure 2.

Two examples of masquerade via leaf mimicry in insects. (a) A maple spanworth moth Prochoerodes lineola. Photos by A Rageo, C McLaren © Creative Commons Attribution Licence. (b) A Peruvian leaf katydid. Photo by G Gallice. © Creative Commons Attribution Licence.

Figure 3.

The Malaysian Orchid Mantis (Hymenopus coronatus) is an example of aggressive masquerade mimicry. Here the mantis resembles an orchid flower, (a) helping it to hide from insect prey flying nearby perhaps coming to nectar feed from the orchid, (b) domestically reared mantid posing on an orchid and (c) enjoying the fruits of the aggressive mimicry. Photos by Cain Eyre.

close

References

Allen J and Cooper J (1985) Crypsis and masquerade. Journal of Biological Education 19: 268–270.

Balogh ACV, Gamberale‐Stille G, Tullberg BS and Leimar O (2010) Feature theory and the two‐step hypothesis of Müllerian mimicry evolution. Evolution 64: 810–822.

Bates HW (1862) Contributions to an insect fauna of the Amazon valley (Lepidoptera: Heliconidae). Transactions of the Linnean Society of London 23: 495–596.

Baxter S, Nadeau N, Maroja L et al. (2010) Genomic hotspots for adaptation: the population genetics of Müllerian mimicry in the Heliconius melpomene clade. PLoS Genetics 6 (e1000796): 1–13.

Beatty CD, Beirinckx K and Sherratt TN (2004) The evolution of Müllerian mimicry in multispecies communities. Nature 431: 63–66.

Brooke MdL and Davies N (1988) Egg mimicry by cuckoos Cuculus canorus in relation to discrimination by hosts. Nature 335: 630–632.

Brown Jr KS and Benson WW (1974) Adaptive polymorphism associated with multiple Müllerian mimicry in Heliconius numata (Lepid. Nymph.). Biotropica 6: 205–228.

Buresch KC, Mäthger LM, Allen JJ et al. (2011) The use of background matching vs. masquerade for camouflage in cuttlefish Sepia officinalis. Vision Research 51: 2362–2368.

Côté IM and Cheney KL (2005) Animal mimicry: choosing when to be a cleaner‐fish mimic. Nature 433: 211–212.

Dasmahapatra KK, Walters JR, Briscoe AD et al. (2012) Butterfly genome reveals promiscuous exchange of mimicry adaptations among species. Nature 487: 94–98.

Davies N, Kilner R and Noble D (1998) Nestling cuckoos, Cuculus canorus, exploit hosts with begging calls that mimic a brood. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 265: 673–678.

Dominey WJ (1981) Maintenance of female mimicry as a reproductive strategy in bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus). Environmental Biology of Fishes 6: 59–64.

Edmunds M (1974) Significance of beak marks on butterfly wings. Oikos 25: 117–118.

Edmunds M (2000) Why are there good and poor mimics? Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 70: 459–466.

Endler JA (1981) An overview of the relationships between mimicry and crypsis. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 16: 25–31.

Fisher RA (1930) The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection: A Complete Variorum Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1999 reprint edn.

Franks D, Ruxton G and Sherratt T (2009) Warning signals evolve to disengage Batesian mimics. Evolution 63: 256–267.

Goodale E and Kotagama SW (2006) Vocal mimicry by a passerine bird attracts other species involved in mixed‐species flocks. Animal Behaviour 72: 471–477.

Halpin CG, Skelhorn J and Rowe C (2012) The relationship between sympatric defended species depends upon predators' discriminatory behaviour. PLoS One 7: e44895.

Hanlon RT, Conroy L and Forsythe JW (2008) Mimicry and foraging behaviour of two tropical sand‐flat octopus species off North Sulawesi, Indonesia. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 93: 23–38.

Higginson AD, De Wert L, Rowland HM, Speed MP and Ruxton GD (2012) Masquerade is associated with polyphagy and larval overwintering in Lepidoptera. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 106: 90–103.

Ihalainen E, Lindstrom L and Mappes J (2007) Investigating Müllerian mimicry: predator learning and variation in prey defences. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 20: 780–791.

Joron M, Papa R, Beltrán M et al. (2006) A conserved supergene locus controls colour pattern diversity in Heliconius butterflies. PLoS Biology 4: e303.

Kelley LA, Coe RL, Madden JR and Healy SD (2008) Vocal mimicry in songbirds. Animal Behaviour 76: 521–528.

Kikuchi DW and Pfennig DW (2010) Predator cognition permits imperfect coral snake mimicry. American Naturalist 176: 830–834.

Kokko H, Mappes J and Lindstrom L (2003) Alternative prey can change model‐mimic dynamics between parasitism and mutualism. Ecology Letters 6: 1068–1076.

Langham GM (2004) Specialized avian predators repeatedly attack novel color morphs of Heliconius butterflies. Evolution 58: 2783–2787.

Lindström L, Alatalo RV, Mappes J et al. (1997) Imperfect Batesian mimicry – the effects of the frequency and the distastefulness of the model. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 264: 149–153.

Macdougall A and Stamp Dawkins M (1998) Predator discrimination error and the benefits of Müllerian mimicry. Animal Behaviour 55: 1281–1288.

Mallet J and Joron M (1999) Evolution of diversity in warning colour and mimicry: polymorphisms, shifting balance, and speciation. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 30: 201–233.

Mappes J and Alatalo RV (1997) Batesian mimicry and signal accuracy. Evolution 51: 2050–2053.

Morrell GM and Turner JR (1970) Experiments on mimicry: I. The response of wild birds to artificial prey. Behaviour 36: 116–130.

Müller F (1879) Ituna and Thyridia: a remarkable case of mimicry in butterflies. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London XX–XXIX.

Nijhout HF (2003) Polymorphic mimicry in Papilio dardanus: mosaic dominance, big effects, and origins. Evolution & development 5: 579–592.

Nur U (1970) Evolutionary rates of models and mimics in Batesian mimicry. American Naturalist 104: 477–486.

Penney HD, Hassall C, Skevington JH, Abbott KR and Sherratt TN (2012) A comparative analysis of the evolution of imperfect mimicry. Nature 483: 461–464.

Pietsch TW (2009) Oceanic Anglerfishes: Extraordinary Diversity in the Deep Sea. Oakland, California: University of California Press.

Rowe MP, Coss RG and Owings DH (1986) Rattlesnake rattles and burrowing owl hisses: a case of acoustic Batesian mimicry. Ethology 72: 53–71.

Rowland HM, Mappes J, Ruxton GD and Speed MP (2010) Mimicry between unequally defended prey can be parasitic: evidence for quasi‐Batesian mimicry. Ecology Letters 13: 1494–1502.

Schaefer HM and Ruxton GD (2009) Deception in plants: mimicry or perceptual exploitation? Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24: 676–685.

Sherratt T (2001) The evolution of female‐limited polymorphisms in damselflies: a signal detection model. Ecology Letters 4: 22–29.

Sherratt TN (2002) The evolution of imperfect mimicry. Behavioral Ecology 13: 821–826.

Skelhorn J, Rowland HM, Delf J, Speed MP and Ruxton GD (2011) Density‐dependent predation influences the evolution and behavior of masquerading prey. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 108: 6532–6536.

Skelhorn J, Rowland HM, Speed MP and Ruxton GD (2010) Masquerade: camouflage without crypsis. Science 327: 51.

Skelhorn J and Ruxton GD (2011) Mimicking multiple models: polyphenetic masqueraders gain additional benefits from crypsis. Behavioral Ecology 22: 60–65.

Speed M (1993) When is mimicry good for predators? Animal Behaviour 46: 1246–1248.

Speed MP, Ruxton GD, Mappes J and Sherratt TN (2012) Why are defensive toxins so variable? An evolutionary perspective. Biological Reviews 87: 874–884.

Srygley RB (1994) Locomotor mimicry in butterflies? The associations of positions of centres of mass among groups of mimetic, unprofitable prey. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 343: 145–155.

Trnka A and Prokop P (2012) The effectiveness of hawk mimicry in protecting cuckoos from aggressive hosts. Animal Behaviour 83: 263–268.

Turner JRG (1977) Butterfly mimicry: the genetical evolution of an adaptation. Evolutionary Biology 10: 163–206.

Further Reading

Joron M (2003) Mimicry. In: Cardé R and Resh C (eds) Encyclopedia of Insects, pp. 714–726. New York, NY: Academic Press.

Leimar O, Tullberg BS and Mallet J (2012) Mimicry, saltational evolution, and the crossing of fitness valleys. In: Svensson E and Calsbeek R (eds) The Adaptive Landscape in Evolutionary Biology, pp. 259–270. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Randall JE (2005) A review of mimicry in marine fishes. Zoological Studies 44: 299.

Ruxton G, Sherratt T and Speed MP (2004) Avoiding Attack: The Evolutionary Ecology of Crypsis, Warning Signals, and Mimicry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sherratt TN (2008) The evolution of Müllerian mimicry. Naturwissenschaften 95: 681–695.

Skelhorn J, Rowland HM and Ruxton GD (2009) The evolution and ecology of masquerade. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 99: 1–8.

Turner JRG (1987) The evolutionary dynamics of batesian and muellerian mimicry: similarities and differences. Ecological Entomology 12: 81–95

Contact Editor close
Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

How to Cite close
Speed, Mike(Jul 2014) Mimicry. In: eLS. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. http://www.els.net [doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0001790.pub3]