z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Deimatism: a neglected component of antipredator defence
Author(s) -
Kate D. L. Umbers,
Sebastiano De Bona,
Thomas E. White,
Jussi Lehtonen,
Johanna Mappes,
John A. Endler
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
biology letters
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.596
H-Index - 110
eISSN - 1744-957X
pISSN - 1744-9561
DOI - 10.1098/rsbl.2016.0936
Subject(s) - aposematism , biology , mimicry , predator , crypsis , predation , ecology , adaptation (eye) , evolutionary biology , neuroscience , cognitive science , psychology
Deimatic or ‘startle’ displays cause a receiver to recoil reflexively in response to a sudden change in sensory input. Deimatism is sometimes implicitly treated as a form of aposematism (unprofitability associated with a signal). However, the fundamental difference is, in order to provide protection, deimatism does not require a predator to have any learned or innate aversion. Instead, deimatism can confer a survival advantage by exploiting existing neural mechanisms in a way that releases a reflexive response in the predator. We discuss the differences among deimatism, aposematism, and forms of mimicry, and their ecological and evolutionary implications. We highlight outstanding questions critical to progress in understanding deimatism.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom