Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8945 total)
348 online now:
Tanypteryx, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (2 members, 346 visitors)
Newest Member: ski zawaski
Happy Birthday: ONESOlivia, perfect
Post Volume: Total: 865,616 Year: 20,652/19,786 Month: 1,049/2,023 Week: 0/557 Day: 0/101 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Mimicry: Please help me understand how
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 166 of 241 (435864)
11-23-2007 12:00 PM
Reply to: Message 163 by Modulous
11-22-2007 3:58 PM



No problem. What do you propose is the cause and origin of aposematism in wasps?

I don't know, but preliminary I doubt it is natural selection due predators.


I didn't see a question about non aposematic colouration of bees, only a question about the honeybee complex. I'm not sure what a honeybee complex is in this context. Are you suggesting that honeybees are not aposematically coloured, or are you suggesting their mimics aren't, or both?

Looking at honeybees I would say they haven't any "warning coloration", they are almost cryptic. It is very strange considering the fact that wasps are "aresposematics" according the neodarwinian hypothesis. Honeybee's venom is more efficient that the venom of wasps. Because the stings obviously play no role in aposematism of wasps I wonder if "natural selection" forget honeybees or what.

Even some scientists (and their researches which are no way "outdated") are surprised by the fact that honeybees should be protected by stings or their venom as neodarwinists claim (and called such claims as "belief"). "Poisonous" bees are very often preyed upon:

quote:

Many researchers seem to assume that predators avoid
bees, the most commonly observed pollinators, due to
their sting. This belief is in disagreement with the long list
of species that prey on bees, most notably, bee eaters
(Meropidae) (Fry 1983), Old and New World ¯ycatchers
(Muscicapidae and Tyrannidae) (Ambrose 1990), beewolves
(Philanthus spp.) (Evans & O'Neill 1988), some
social wasps (Evans & Eberhard 1970; De Jong 1990),
crab spiders (Thomisidae) (Morse 1981; Morse 1986),
predacious bugs (Hemiptera) (Balduf 1939; Greco &
Kevan 1995) and praying mantids (Mantidae) (Caron 1990).
.
.
.
Research in other systems, a long list of bee predators and
formal theory all suggest that bees and other pollinators
should show antipredatory behaviour, which may affect
pollinator±plant interactions (Dukas, in press).

If you want to save some money do not order the artile at blackwell synergy but have a look here instead:

http://psych.mcmaster.ca/dukas/Dukas%202001.pdf


This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Modulous, posted 11-22-2007 3:58 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by Modulous, posted 11-23-2007 1:25 PM MartinV has responded
 Message 169 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-23-2007 3:43 PM MartinV has not yet responded

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 420 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 167 of 241 (435868)
11-23-2007 1:25 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by MartinV
11-23-2007 12:00 PM


What do you propose is the cause and origin of aposematism in wasps?

I don't know, but preliminary I doubt it is natural selection due predators.

OK, so perhaps we should skip the coming to agreement about this?

Looking at honeybees I would say they haven't any "warning coloration", they are almost cryptic. It is very strange considering the fact that wasps are "aresposematics" according the neodarwinian hypothesis

Let us just accept your premise, though I'd appreciate if you could provide some information as to why you think they are cryptic rather than aposematic. Nevertheless that wouldn't mean it was strange, there are many different strategies to survival and reproduction. There is no compulsion for Mullerian mimicry to affect all stinging insects, it can just explain it when it occurs.

As far as I am aware, honeybees and yellow-jacket wasps are considered to be a complex that is considered Mullerian in nature. Honeybees taste a bit less noxious to predators, from Imperfect Mimicry:

quote:
When tasted or eaten, honeybees induced the same unpalatability reactions as for wasps (see below), but these were more limited in degree, and appeared less frequently.

It goes on to mention that where honeybees are more noxious (Africa) there seems to more mimicry. You might not think this mimicry is based on aposematisism and that's fine - it's still mimicry though.

Even some scientists (and their researches which are no way "outdated") are surprised by the fact that honeybees should be protected by stings or their venom as neodarwinists claim (and called such claims as "belief"). "Poisonous" bees are very often preyed upon:

Once again, I've not stated that bees don't have natural predators. You are just repeating points raised earlier (indeed, you raised this point in your first message), I responded in Message 16, and you changed the subject. I don't feel like doing it again.

Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by MartinV, posted 11-23-2007 12:00 PM MartinV has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by MartinV, posted 11-23-2007 2:34 PM Modulous has responded

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 168 of 241 (435876)
11-23-2007 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by Modulous
11-23-2007 1:25 PM



Once again, I've not stated that bees don't have natural predators. You are just repeating points raised earlier (indeed, you raised this point in your first message), I responded in more or less (Message 16), and you changed the subject. I don't feel like doing it again.

But this is the crucial point even if you don't want to address it again. The article about the predators of bees (and waps, have you ever heard about birds family specialised on bees, wasps, hornets called Meropidae? Meropidae or "bee-eaters" bird's family has many species). Again:

quote:

This belief is in disagreement with the long list
of species that prey on bees, most notably, bee eaters
(Meropidae) (Fry 1983),

It might mean that poisonous hymenoptera are preyed upon in the same degree as other insects that are not poisonous and are not aposematics. Using conclusions of McAtee who summarized results of contents of 80.000 birds stomach:

quote:

In other words there is utilization of animals of practically every kind for food approximately in proportion to their numbers. This means that predation takes place much the same as if there were no such thing as protective adaptations.

You only repeat again and again:


Once again, I've not stated that bees (wasps) don't have natural predators.

But if wasps and bees are to be eaten in the same degree as other insect species then the protective value of their venom should be reconsidered. Many bird's species maybe don't like wasps venom, but they get rid of it beating wasps on branches.

Considering all these facts there is no need to suppose that "warning coloration" of wasps has any effect to predators. You may repeat that "some birds eat some wasps but it shouldn't be use as an evidence that aposematism is ineffective" of course again and again.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Modulous, posted 11-23-2007 1:25 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by Modulous, posted 11-23-2007 4:15 PM MartinV has responded
 Message 171 by Omnivorous, posted 11-23-2007 7:22 PM MartinV has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 169 of 241 (435884)
11-23-2007 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by MartinV
11-23-2007 12:00 PM


Looking at honeybees I would say they haven't any "warning coloration", they are almost cryptic.

Have you ever tried looking at them with your eyes open?

Because the stings obviously play no role in aposematism of wasps ...

What a strange lie.

I'd ask you if you had any evidence for it, only having read this thread I know that the answer is no.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by MartinV, posted 11-23-2007 12:00 PM MartinV has not yet responded

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 420 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 170 of 241 (435887)
11-23-2007 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by MartinV
11-23-2007 2:34 PM


But if wasps and bees are to be eaten in the same degree as other insect species then the protective value of their venom should be reconsidered.

Agreed.

Considering all these facts there is no need to suppose that "warning coloration" of wasps has any effect to predators.

The evolution of aposematism is not the topic, but mimicry is. All that needs to happen, for whatever reason, is that predators learn to avoid noxious models and we have the potential for mimicry. There are other driving factors to mimicry which we haven't touched on, and we'll skip by them for now.

If predators avoid non-noxious mimics after having eaten a noxious model more than they would have had they not eaten a noxious model, then we have a selective pressure towards mimicry. Studies explicitly designed to test this hypothesis have been carried out in the field and in naturalistic lab conditions. They show that birds do come to recognize noxious models and that they also mistake mimics for them and if there is choice towards something tastier, they tend to avoid them.

This has been carried out with things other than birds - such as toads with similar results. If an insect can fool a predator just one in ten thousand times into not eating it because it looks like something that the predator would rather not eat right now - we have selective pressure.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by MartinV, posted 11-23-2007 2:34 PM MartinV has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by MartinV, posted 11-24-2007 2:27 PM Modulous has responded

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3811
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 171 of 241 (435916)
11-23-2007 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by MartinV
11-23-2007 2:34 PM


It isn't that simple.
Even if birds have evolved behaviors that allow the predation of noxious insects, those insect species may previously have gained benefits from their noxious venom. The arms race of prey v. predator is dynamic, not static, and evolved bird hehaviors become new selective pressures on the insects.

Everything changes. For example, South American macaws ingest clays that buffer toxic fruit: nonetheless, the toxicity of the fruit has benefits in regard to other potential consuming species, and no doubt once deterred the macaws.

Further, the existence of bird species that have evolved behaviors that allow the predation of noxious insects does not mean that the noxious venom is useless: many bird species may be deterred, even if all are not.

In addition, there are species other than birds that may be deterred.

Finally, many noxious insects are social. The complete elimination of predation on individuals may not be the point: the recognition of an erupting hive of noxious insects may evoke avoidance behaviors by predators, even if the appearance of a single such insect does not. Thus, the predation of noxious individuals may be opportunistic and of relatively trival importance to the hive.

It is tempting to oversimplify that which we wish to refute, and I believe this is what you have done.


Real things always push back.
-William James

Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by MartinV, posted 11-23-2007 2:34 PM MartinV has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by MartinV, posted 11-24-2007 3:36 PM Omnivorous has not yet responded
 Message 178 by MartinV, posted 11-24-2007 4:39 PM Omnivorous has not yet responded

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 172 of 241 (436130)
11-24-2007 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by Modulous
11-23-2007 4:15 PM



If an insect can fool a predator just one in ten thousand times into not eating it because it looks like something that the predator would rather not eat right now - we have selective pressure.

Then you have to explain the coloration of honey-bees. Honey-bees have no way "aposematic coloration". If your neodarwinian hypothesis is right than you must explain the force that prevents honeybees to get "aposematic coloration". What kind of force it is?

You must also explain the force that prevent "imperfect mimics" of wasps to look like a "perfect mimics" of wasps.

Every "imperfect mimic" of wasps having more resemblance to wasps should obtain "survival advantage". Such an "imperfect mimic" looking more waspish should have more offsprigs you know. Yet there is the abundance of "imperfect mimics" of wasps. What's the force preventing them to look like a "perfect mimics"? They have the ability to fool predators "one in ten thousand times" as you have written. Doesn't "natural selection" give some "survival advantage" to the more waspish looking individuals or what?
If yes, why there are so many "imperfect mimics" of wasps?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Modulous, posted 11-23-2007 4:15 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by Modulous, posted 11-24-2007 2:46 PM MartinV has responded
 Message 185 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-26-2007 3:02 AM MartinV has not yet responded

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 420 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 173 of 241 (436140)
11-24-2007 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 172 by MartinV
11-24-2007 2:27 PM


Then you have to explain the coloration of honey-bees.

Why?

Honey-bees have no way "aposematic coloration".

What difference does aposematicism make to the argument?

If your neodarwinian hypothesis is right than you must explain the force that prevents honeybees to get "aposematic coloration". What kind of force it is?

If honeybees have no aposematic colouration, they share this fact with many species. Why single out honeybees?

You must also explain the force that prevent "imperfect mimics" of wasps to look like a "perfect mimics" of wasps.

Every "imperfect mimic" of wasps having more resemblance to wasps should obtain "survival advantage".

Sometimes, in a fitness landscape, there are some chasms that cannot be leapt without taking a significant drop in fitness. Natural selection isn't about perfection, just 'good enough'. You could drop mimicry all together and simply say "If having stings or tasting noxious is a good defence mechanism, why don't all insects have this defence mechanism?"


This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by MartinV, posted 11-24-2007 2:27 PM MartinV has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by MartinV, posted 11-24-2007 2:53 PM Modulous has responded

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 174 of 241 (436144)
11-24-2007 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by Modulous
11-24-2007 2:46 PM



If honeybees have no aposematic colouration, they share this fact with many species. Why single out honeybees?

Really? How many Hymenoptera and Diptera have poisonous sacks and stings? Why some of them having it (wasps) are "aposematics" and the others (bees which venom is more effective than that of wasps) are no aposematics?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Modulous, posted 11-24-2007 2:46 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by Modulous, posted 11-24-2007 3:00 PM MartinV has responded

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 420 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 175 of 241 (436147)
11-24-2007 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by MartinV
11-24-2007 2:53 PM


Really?

Yes.

Why some of them having it (wasps) are "aposematics" and the others (bees which venom is more effective than that of wasps) are no aposematics?

The topic isn't about the evolution of aposematicism. Care to get back to mimicry? Whether or not honeybees are aposematic is irrelevant - things mimic them, and predators confuse the two is the relevant discussion here.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by MartinV, posted 11-24-2007 2:53 PM MartinV has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by MartinV, posted 11-24-2007 3:17 PM Modulous has responded

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 176 of 241 (436154)
11-24-2007 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by Modulous
11-24-2007 3:00 PM


The point is that "mimicry" of wasps doesn't exist. If you want to prove it you should prove that "warning coloration" of wasps have some effect regarding predators. Because the venom of bees is more effective than the venom of the wasps you should also give some explanation of the fact that bees are no aposematics.


The topic isn't about the evolution of aposematicism.

If there is no aposematism why to think about mimicry of aposematic species?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by Modulous, posted 11-24-2007 3:00 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by Modulous, posted 11-24-2007 6:24 PM MartinV has responded

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 177 of 241 (436168)
11-24-2007 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Omnivorous
11-23-2007 7:22 PM


Re: It isn't that simple.

Further, the existence of bird species that have evolved behaviors that allow the predation of noxious insects does not mean that the noxious venom is useless: many bird species may be deterred, even if all are not.

What species do you have in your mind? Be more precise: eagles, hawks, owls? You know eagles do not prey upon wasps but I doubt it is due wasps "aposematism".


In addition, there are species other than birds that may be deterred.

What species do you have in your mind? Frogs, dragonflies, spiders or what? No problem to discuss it. Give just examples. Dragonflies?

quote:

Despite the dearth of field-based evidence from natural model-mimic communities, theory suggests that Batesian mimicry should have limits placed upon the model:mimic ratio for mimics to benefit. Paradoxically, hoverflies that are apparently mimics are often superabundant, many times more abundant than their supposed models. One possible solution to this paradox is that perhaps they are not mimics at all.


http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0962-8452%2819930322%29251%3A1332%3C195%3AIMAPP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-E&size=LARGE&origin=JSTOR-enlargePage

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Omnivorous, posted 11-23-2007 7:22 PM Omnivorous has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by Modulous, posted 11-24-2007 6:29 PM MartinV has not yet responded

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 178 of 241 (436193)
11-24-2007 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Omnivorous
11-23-2007 7:22 PM


Re: It isn't that simple.
In my previous post I addressed also mimicry. But there is no need to think that wasp coloration deters predators other than birds:

quote:

However, dragonflies showed no differences between attacks on prey with wasp-like colours and patterns and those on the same-sized prey that were nonmimetic. Moreover, dragonflies avoided attacking both mock-painted and black-painted wasps entirely. Overall, we found no evidence to support the hypothesis that wasp-like warning signals protect small insect prey from attack by dragonflies, although size seems to be an important cue in dragonfly prey choice.

Obviously in the case it is the size that counts, not "warning coloration" of wasps.

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17244503


This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Omnivorous, posted 11-23-2007 7:22 PM Omnivorous has not yet responded

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 420 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 179 of 241 (436222)
11-24-2007 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by MartinV
11-24-2007 3:17 PM


The point is that "mimicry" of wasps doesn't exist. If you want to prove it you should prove that "warning coloration" of wasps have some effect regarding predators. Because the venom of bees is more effective than the venom of the wasps you should also give some explanation of the fact that bees are no aposematics.

All I need to show is that after eating noxious tasting insects, there is a tendency in predators to avoid things that look like noxious tasting insects. It doesn't matter why an insect looks noxious, only that a predator is able to discriminate a noxious insect from a non-noxious one - fooled only by non-noxious mimics of course.

If there is no aposematism why to think about mimicry of aposematic species?

That question doesn't even make sense. Either way it doesn't matter. As long as predators can identify a noxious insect in the future after having eaten one in the past - regardless of how that discrimination takes place, we can be assured that there is a possibility that mimicry may occur in non-noxious insects. Where mimicry does occur, it should be some characteristic that the birds use to discriminate between noxious and non-noxious insects. That might be a certain colouration or it might be a smell or a flight pattern. You chose to focus on colouration, but now you are trying to steer the topic into realms of suggesting that birds don't discriminate in terms of colouration - yet evidence exists that they do.

You have simply dismissed this evidence.

And that's basically where we stand.

The evolution of these characteristics in models is not important, the evolution of these characteristics in mimics is.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by MartinV, posted 11-24-2007 3:17 PM MartinV has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by MartinV, posted 11-24-2007 10:58 PM Modulous has responded

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 420 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 180 of 241 (436223)
11-24-2007 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by MartinV
11-24-2007 3:36 PM


reading skills and the topic
One possible solution to this paradox is that perhaps they are not mimics at all.

If they aren't mimics, they aren't the topic. However, read the next two sentences where it says that they are mimics according to pigeons.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by MartinV, posted 11-24-2007 3:36 PM MartinV has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019