Sexual deception involves the mimicry of another species＇ sexual signals in order to exploit behavioural routines linked to those signals. Known sexually deceptive systems use visual, acoustic or olfactory mimicry to...Sexual deception involves the mimicry of another species＇ sexual signals in order to exploit behavioural routines linked to those signals. Known sexually deceptive systems use visual, acoustic or olfactory mimicry to exploit insects for preda- tion, cleptoparasitism and pollination. It is predicted that where sexual deception inflicts a cost on the receiver, a coevolutionary arms race could result in the evolution of discriminating receivers and increasingly refined mimicry. We constructed a conceptual model to understand the importance of trade-offs in the coevolution of sexually deceptive mimic and receiver. Four components examined were： the cost of mimicry, the cost to receiver for being fooled, the density of mimics and the relative magnitude of a mimicry-independent component of fitness. The model predicts that the exploitation of non-discriminating receivers by accurate signal mimicry will evolve as an evolutionary stable strategy under a wide range of the parameter space explored. This is due to the difficulty in minimising the costs of being fooled without incurring the cost of falsely rejecting real mating opportunities. In the model, the evolution of deception is impeded when mimicry imposes substantial costs for both sides of the arms race. Olfac- tory signals that are potentially cheap to produce are therefore likely to be more vulnerable to exploitation than expensive visual ornaments展开更多
文摘Sexual deception involves the mimicry of another species＇ sexual signals in order to exploit behavioural routines linked to those signals. Known sexually deceptive systems use visual, acoustic or olfactory mimicry to exploit insects for preda- tion, cleptoparasitism and pollination. It is predicted that where sexual deception inflicts a cost on the receiver, a coevolutionary arms race could result in the evolution of discriminating receivers and increasingly refined mimicry. We constructed a conceptual model to understand the importance of trade-offs in the coevolution of sexually deceptive mimic and receiver. Four components examined were： the cost of mimicry, the cost to receiver for being fooled, the density of mimics and the relative magnitude of a mimicry-independent component of fitness. The model predicts that the exploitation of non-discriminating receivers by accurate signal mimicry will evolve as an evolutionary stable strategy under a wide range of the parameter space explored. This is due to the difficulty in minimising the costs of being fooled without incurring the cost of falsely rejecting real mating opportunities. In the model, the evolution of deception is impeded when mimicry imposes substantial costs for both sides of the arms race. Olfac- tory signals that are potentially cheap to produce are therefore likely to be more vulnerable to exploitation than expensive visual ornaments
