Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2004 Dec 7;271(1556):2495–2499. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2004.2894

Do aposematism and Batesian mimicry require bright colours? A test, using European viper markings.

Wolfgang Wüster 1, Christopher S E Allum 1, I Birta Bjargardóttir 1, Kimberley L Bailey 1, Karen J Dawson 1, Jamel Guenioui 1, John Lewis 1, Joe McGurk 1, Alix G Moore 1, Martti Niskanen 1, Christopher P Pollard 1
PMCID: PMC1691880  PMID: 15590601

Abstract

Predator avoidance of noxious prey, aposematism and defensive mimicry are normally associated with bright, contrasting patterns and colours. However, noxious prey may be unable to evolve conspicuous coloration because of other selective constraints, such as the need to be inconspicuous to their own prey or to specialist predators. Many venomous snakes, particularly most vipers, display patterns that are apparently cryptic, but nevertheless highly characteristic, and appear to be mimicked by other, non-venomous snakes. However, predator avoidance of viper patterns has never been demonstrated experimentally. Here, the analysis of 813 avian attacks on 12,636 Plasticine snake models in the field shows that models bearing the characteristic zigzag band of the adder (Vipera berus) are attacked significantly less frequently than plain models. This suggests that predator avoidance of inconspicuously but characteristically patterned noxious prey is possible. Our findings emphasize the importance of mimicry in the ecological and morphological diversification of advanced snakes.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (164.3 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Endler John A., Mappes Johanna. Predator mixes and the conspicuousness of aposematic signals. Am Nat. 2004 Apr 19;163(4):532–547. doi: 10.1086/382662. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Greene H. W., McDiarmid R. W. Coral snake mimicry: does it occur? Science. 1981 Sep 11;213(4513):1207–1212. doi: 10.1126/science.213.4513.1207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Lindström L., Alatalo R. V., Lyytinen A., Mappes J. Predator experience on cryptic prey affects the survival of conspicuous aposematic prey. Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Feb 22;268(1465):357–361. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1377. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Pfennig D. W., Harcombe W. R., Pfennig K. S. Frequency-dependent Batesian mimicry. Nature. 2001 Mar 15;410(6826):323–323. doi: 10.1038/35066628. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Sherratt Thomas N., Beatty Christopher D. The evolution of warning signals as reliable indicators of prey defense. Am Nat. 2003 Oct 16;162(4):377–389. doi: 10.1086/378047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Smith S. M. Innate recognition of coral snake pattern by a possible avian predator. Science. 1975 Feb 28;187(4178):759–760. doi: 10.1126/science.187.4178.759. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary data file
15590601s01.pdf (523.4KB, pdf)

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES