The Mullerian mimics

The Mullerian mimics - the other and thus fits strict...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
The Mullerian mimics Heliconius erato and H. melpomene . illustrate both the frequency dependent nature of mimicry and the fact that each can influence the evolution of the other. One would expect that the more abundant species would be the model in a mullerian system, since it is what the selective agent (predation) is cueing on. In general H. erato is the more abundant of the two species and H. melpomene mimics the wing patterns of H. erato . In one area of overlap of the two species, H. melpomene is the more abundant and H. erato assumes the hindwing band pattern of H. melpomene (see figure below). Thus depending on local conditions, both species are influencing the adaptive responses of
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: the other and thus fits strict definition of coevolution. A crucial component of coevolution is phylogenetic analysis . If the cladograms of the host and the cladograms of the parasite are congruent (e.g., figs. 22.2 - 22.3, pg. 612-613) this certainly suggests coevolutionary phenomena. But again, be careful andthink about it : cospeciation is just " association by descent ". Have there been reciprocal phenomena?; maybe just the speciation of the host induced the speciation of the parasite and there was not parasite induced speciation of the host. One needs to know the evolutionary history before we can make firm statements about "co"evolution....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online