Author
Listed:
- John Skelhorn
- Graeme D. Ruxton
Abstract
How insect defense chemicals have evolved has remained relatively understudied, compared with the evolution of aposematic signals of such defenses. Because there is mounting evidence that chemical defenses can generally be expected to be costly, understanding the evolution of such defenses and their maintenance in the face of the potential for automimicry (signaling by individuals that do not invest in defense) is nontrivial. One potential explanation is that chemically defended insects suffer less from predation than those that do not invest in chemical defenses. Here, we use a series of models to explore aspects of the evolution of such costly chemical defenses. Our models predict that investment in costly defenses can occur across a wide range of predation intensities; however, if predation intensity is low, then the defense has to be very effective to be selected, unless the defense is very cheap. Furthermore, the evolution of antipredatory defenses will be relatively insensitive to the severity of any mechanism, whereby prey pay a cost every time they use their defense against an attacking predator even if they survive the attack, but sensitive to the form of the relationship between initial investment in constituting the defense and survival benefit. Once defense becomes common in the prey population, prey may get a frequency-dependent benefit if predators learn to avoid prey of this type after several attacks. Finally, we predict that increasing the rate of avoidance learning by predators encourages reduced investment in antipredatory defenses by prey. The potential for these predictions to be tested empirically is discussed. Copyright 2008, Oxford University Press.
Suggested Citation
John Skelhorn & Graeme D. Ruxton, 2008.
"Ecological factors influencing the evolution of insects' chemical defenses,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 19(1), pages 146-153.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:19:y:2008:i:1:p:146-153
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:19:y:2008:i:1:p:146-153. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.