Table 4.1
Examples of
predator
adaptations and
counteradaptations by
prey.
Predator activity
Predator adaptations
Counter-adaptations by
prey
Searching for prey
Improved visual acuity
Crypsis (background
matching, disruptive
patterns, countershading)
Polymorphism
Space out
Search image
Search limited area where
prey abundant
Recognition of prey
Learning
Masquerade (resemble
inedible object)
Warning signals of toxicity
(aposematism, Müllerian
mimicry)
Deceive predators by
mimicking defended prey
(Batesian mimicry)
Catching prey
Secretive approach, motor
skills (speed, agility)
Signal to predator that
it’s been detected
Escape flight
Startle response:
eyespots
Deflect attack
Weapons of defence
Weapons of offence
Handling prey
Subduing skills
Detoxification ability
Active defence, spines,
tough integuments
Toxins
No. species of
caterpillars
Dispersion
Aposematic
Cryptic
Family
groups
9
0
Solitary
11
44
Table 4.2 Brightly
coloured species
of caterpillars of
British butterflies
are more likely to
be aggregated in
family groups
than cryptic
species (Harvey
et al., 1983).
Reproductive success of host
Host response
Accept
Reject
Not parasitized
Parasitized
(4 host eggs)
(3 host + 1 cuckoo egg) a
Correct acceptance b
Missed rejection c
(4)
(0)
False alarm d
True alarm e
(3)
(0.7 × 3) + (0.3 × 0) = 2.1
a
Average clutch is four eggs. The cuckoo removes one host egg and replaces it with her
own egg. b Hosts raise all four eggs. c The cuckoo egg remains and the cuckoo chick
ejects all host eggs. d Assume hosts reject one egg. e Hosts again reject one egg but field
observations show that they make recognition errors: in 70% cases they reject the
cuckoo egg and so save their three remaining eggs but in 30% cases they reject one of
their own eggs, so the cuckoo egg remains and the cuckoo chick ejects their eggs.