The evolution and ecology of multiple antipredator defences

Open Access
Authors
  • D.W. Kikuchi
  • W.L. Allen
  • K. Arbuckle
  • T.G. Aubier
  • E.S. Briolat
  • E.R. Burdfield-Steel ORCID logo
  • K.L. Cheney
  • K. Daňková
  • M. Elias
  • L. Hämäläinen
  • M.E. Herberstein
  • Thomas J. Hossie
  • Mathieu Joron
  • K. Kunte
  • B.C. Leavell
  • C. Lindstedt
  • U. Lorioux-Chevalier
  • M. McClure
  • C.F. McLellan
  • I. Medina
  • V. Nawge
  • E. Páez
  • A. Pal
  • S. Pekár
  • O. Penacchio
  • J. Raška
  • T. Reader
  • B. Rojas
  • K.H. Rönkä
  • D.C. Rößler
  • C. Rowe
  • H.M. Rowland
  • A. Roy
  • K.A. Schaal
  • T.N. Sherratt
  • J. Skelhorn
  • H.R. Smart
  • T. Stankowich
  • A.M. Stefan
  • K. Summers
  • C.H. Taylor
  • R. Thorogood
  • K. Umbers
  • A.E. Winters
  • J. Yeager
  • A. Exnerová
Publication date 01-07-2023
Journal Journal of Evolutionary Biology
Volume | Issue number 36 | 7
Pages (from-to) 975-991
Number of pages 17
Organisations
  • Faculty of Science (FNWI) - Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics (IBED)
Abstract

Prey seldom rely on a single type of antipredator defence, often using multiple defences to avoid predation. In many cases, selection in different contexts may favour the evolution of multiple defences in a prey. However, a prey may use multiple defences to protect itself during a single predator encounter. Such “defence portfolios” that defend prey against a single instance of predation are distributed across and within successive stages of the predation sequence (encounter, detection, identification, approach (attack), subjugation and consumption). We contend that at present, our understanding of defence portfolio evolution is incomplete, and seen from the fragmentary perspective of specific sensory systems (e.g., visual) or specific types of defences (especially aposematism). In this review, we aim to build a comprehensive framework for conceptualizing the evolution of multiple prey defences, beginning with hypotheses for the evolution of multiple defences in general, and defence portfolios in particular. We then examine idealized models of resource trade-offs and functional interactions between traits, along with evidence supporting them. We find that defence portfolios are constrained by resource allocation to other aspects of life history, as well as functional incompatibilities between different defences. We also find that selection is likely to favour combinations of defences that have synergistic effects on predator behaviour and prey survival. Next, we examine specific aspects of prey ecology, genetics and development, and predator cognition that modify the predictions of current hypotheses or introduce competing hypotheses. We outline schema for gathering data on the distribution of prey defences across species and geography, determining how multiple defences are produced, and testing the proximate mechanisms by which multiple prey defences impact predator behaviour. Adopting these approaches will strengthen our understanding of multiple defensive strategies.

Document type Review article
Note With supplementary files.
Language English
Published at https://doi.org/10.1111/jeb.14192
Other links https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85162910960
Downloads
jeb14192 (Final published version)
Supplementary materials
Permalink to this page
Back