Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Welcome to kingsnake.com's message board system. Here you may share and discuss information with others about your favorite reptile and amphibian related topics such as care and feeding, caging requirements, permits and licenses, and more. Launched in 1997, the kingsnake.com message board system is one of the oldest and largest systems on the internet.

Click for 65% off Shipping with Reptiles 2 You
Click for ZooMed
Click for 65% off Shipping with Reptiles 2 You

tricolor mimicry beyond coralsnake range

53kw Aug 15, 2010 06:04 PM

One of the classic challenges to arguments favoring Batesian mimicry of coralsnakes in tricolor milk snakes is that so many milk snakes and other potential mimics occur outside the range of coralsnakes. This challenge failed to consider that migratory birds encounter coralsnakes while wintering in Central America and retain inhibitions acquired there when they return North. These birds, likely the target predators for this mimetic model, will avoid anything that looks like a coralsnake regardeless of where they are.

I often see antipredator mechanisms discussed in terms of extreme deterrence, but it's not necessary for predators to be completely frightened off, just derailed a bit. I can attest that when trying to catch a wild animal by hand, one must be fully committed to the grab. Any hesitation will result in split-second delays that allow prey to escape, which they are in the process of doing even as the predatory strike begins. Antipredator devices such as tail coiling in Regal ringneck snakes, mimicry in tricolor milk snakes, Long-nosed snakes, even ground and Shovel-nosed snakes, are all quite useful even if all they do is give pause--which is all the prey needs to escape often enough to select for the trait.

The significance of inducing hesitancy in predators is not included in evaluations of antipredator adaptations often enough, IMO. More acknowledgement of the life-and-death value of inducing hesitancy in predatory strikes would allow the public to appreciate why apparent half-measures like the relatively undeveloped resemblance of Long-nosed snakes to coralsnakes are still selectively advantageous.

Mutations that produce any color scheme are random and there is no guarantee that color schemes will refine over time. It's tempting to think of Long-nosed snakes as a work in progress as far as their resemblance of coralsnakes but this may be the best they will ever do. Even the coralsnakes may have been out of luck as venomous animals that could defend themselves until random mutation gave them colors predators could use to identify them on sight. Non-venomous animals would find that being brightly colored in a world with no dangerous models is a one-way ticket to an early death, so any accidental mutations that produced bright colors in prehistoric times, before venomous coralsnakes, were likely quickly snuffed out leaving no descendants. After the development of a reservoir of Mullerian mimics in the form of 50-odd species of coralsnakes, those same random mutations that once made unprotected species more vulnerable would have become beneficial.

I think one of the most thought-provoking snakes is the black milk snake. It begins life as a coralsnake mimic, protecting itself during its most vulnerable time of life. Later, its priorities change as it needs to warm its large body in the cold, cloudy altitudes where it lives. Being black to warm effectively even in cloudy weather is more important to an adult black milk snake than retaining a resemblance to a protected model. If we needed an example of how mimicry is a bona fide value, I think perhaps this is it--protection when it's most critical, then abandoned for the higher adult priority of thermoregulation at altitude. Baby black milks can thermoregulate their smaller mass easily regardless of what color they are, making their higher priority survival by mimicry.

It's unlikely that black milk snakes moved to higher elevations first and then developed this ontogenetic color change. The ancestral black milk snakes would have already been turning black as adults before being able to exploit the thermally challenging habitat they now inhabit. There may have been a geologcially narrow window of time for the melanistic population to move to higher elevations before predators at lower elevations finished off the no-longer mimetic adults. Probably a percentage of the ancestors of black milk snakes expressed adult melanism, leaving a reservoir of founders in their ancestral habitat; the darkest ancestral black milk snakes lucked into a mutation that took a general tendency for later-life melanism to useful levels. In any case, modern black milk snakes are the only ones that undergo such dramatic color change. They are excellent examples of mutations that enable survival in habitats that demand different priorities at different ages.

Any attribute that enhances survival in baby snakes is a powerful selective advantage, and resemblance to potentially lethal snakes encountered during birds' seasonal residence in coralsnake territory has to be one of the all-time lucky rolls of the genetic dice.

Replies (42)

Arkanis Aug 15, 2010 06:50 PM

Interesting - thanks for this. You mentioned the black kingsnake which starts off as a coral mimic - another snake very similar to this is lystrophis pulcher (tricolor hognose or false coral snake) neonates are brightly colored coral mimics and many become very dark to black over time as they mature. Perhaps some of the same thermoregulation dynamics come into play or something.

I read something somewhere saying that perhaps tricolors were not directly mimicing coral snake models but rather non-deadly venomous snakes which would leave survivors to pass on the behavior - unlike corals which would kill those they encountered. Alternately, natural selection favored those birds which were not attracted to the bright triads

53kw Aug 15, 2010 07:25 PM

There are encounters with coralsnakes that don't result in death, although your point that non-lethal encounters are necessary to teach predators is a good one. Coralsnakes are accepted as a Mullerian mimetic complex. If that conventional wisdom is accurate, it would seem that there must be a non-lethal component somewhere in the equation. If there are non-lethal tricolors, are the coralsnakes mimicking them, rather than being the center of the mimetic complex? It would still be a Mullerian mimetic complex if several taxa were all protected and similar in appearance. If it turns out that coralsnakes are mimicking non-lethal tricolors, then after all this time we would have to acknowledge milk snakes to be mimics of those species as founding models rather than coralsnakes.

There are caterpillars in the tropics that mimic coralsnakes, too. Some of the caterpillars are quite toxic if eaten. They are also Mullerian mimics. The great Mullerian mimetic complexes of the tropics are the fuel for Batesian complexes stretching along the north-south axis of the entire hemisphere. It's revealing that mimicry runs mostly north-south, along flyways.

There was a study published about mimetic butterflies in the Philippines that supported bird-migration-based mimetic complexes. The same hemisphere-spanning mimetic events play out in butterflies like the Pipevine swallowtail butterflies, whose stronghold is Central America, and their large complex of mimics including all the dark swallowtail butterflies like Spicebush and Black swallowtails, and Nymphalids like the Red-spotted Purple. The world is a vital, wondrous place, full of unexpected connections even across distance and time.

Sunherp Aug 16, 2010 11:05 AM

would weed out the members of a predator population that don't avoid the bright colors of aposematism. In that sense, the species "learns" as a whole, through changes in gene frequencies for avoidance of certain potential food items (like Micrurus). The idea that individual animals actually learn to avoid toxic snakes and pass their knowledge along is flawed in several contexts for most species. While it's possible that this happens with some Pliocercus, etc., innate avoidance for the tricolored pattern has been fairly reliably shown to exist.

-Cole

53kw Aug 16, 2010 09:22 PM

The idea that avoidance of tricolor patterns is innate, at least after many generations of exposure, could work, although it could also work just fine if learned in each new generation. I recall workers studying poisonous butterflies, using naive birds to explore the learning curve. I had taken that to be an indication that new generations of birds needed to learn to avoid aposomatically colored targets. While I note that there are still ample records of birds making fatal mistakes by trying to eat coralsnakes, there may well be something to the idea of genetically selecting for predators that innately avoid coralsnakes.

As far as black milk snakes avoiding temps over 72, that has not been my experience. My black milks bask until surface body temps reach the low 80s. In upper elevations in Costa Rica, in black milk snake country, air temps can be in the low 60s much of the day on cloudy days. Travelers there report needing coats to hike. Of all routine body functions, digestion especially would be difficult for a large snake if it could not warm sufficiently.

I'm not convinced that selection "forces" adaptation. Mutations enable exploitation of niches and lifestyles but adaptive radiation begins with a mutation rather than a mutation being a response to opportunity. Still, any collateral events, unknown to the animals involved, may influence success and select for traits with multiple advantages.

As far as Micrurus alleni darkening with age, could they also realize any value from melanism-enhanced thermoregulation? I'm not familiar enough with the details of M. alleni to answer that.

Vinny made an excellent point about ancestral ranges. How long have these spectacular animals been interacting, across unremembered millenia? How long for target predators to learn or inherit apprehension of this aposomatic color scheme? However, I don't think the colors came first, as they call attention to the snakes which is only an advantage if the snakes are protected in some way--if it's a disadvantage, it doesn't last. I also think, especially given some of the recent work with poisonous butterflies, that it's well established that the ranges of model and mimic do not need to have ever overlapped for mimicry to develop and even to become quite sophisticated. Nevertheless, it would have given quite a boost to the process if coralsnakes ranged farther into the range of the ancestral milk snakes, which it seems likely they did. That might explain the level of development of some of the more northern mimics.

There is simple erythrism in all sorts of populations--red toads, pink coachwhips, red-phase Mangrove salt marsh water snakes, etc. My proposal is that ancestral coralsnakes were venomous first but were preyed on just like other snakes before predators could identify them. Eventually, erythrism popped up in venomous coralsnakes only this time it wasn't a bulls-eye for predators but a warning that could be used to distinguish coralsnakes from edible species. In time the patterns developed. The difference in patterning between coralsnakes and milk snakes is, in this model, a quirk of genetic expression--we see what might be proto-mimic patterns in snakes like Long-nosed snakes where red invades the black saddles. It's been suggested that Long-nosed snakes are distantly related to king snakes. If correct, perhaps the same tendency for red (if it expresses at all) to invade black areas resulted in the red-touch-black patterns of milk snakes. I'm not familiar enough with ancestral coralsnakes to suggest living examples of the early stages of their pattern development.

Fun and thought-provoking thread, all. Snakes rule.

Sunherp Aug 18, 2010 04:02 PM

I'll have to dig for the papers for further details, but it's been unequivocally shown that some species of Aves are innately programmed to avoid brightly banded objects. It's interesting, and I suspect with all of the different tricolored species in the Americas, that there's a blending of Batesian and Mullerian interactions taking place. A very similar (convergent) situation has taken place in Southeast Asia, where another Elapid genus (Calliophis - formerly Sinomicrurus) is brightly colored and is mimiced by a Colubrid with markedly similar coloration and pattern (Oreocryptophis).

As for Micrurus alleni, I'd suspect that the species could also gain some thermoregulatory benefit from the ontogenic melanism. Regarless, Clelia inhabbits the same area and also experiences ontogenic melanism after starting life as a bright red hatchling. Could they be gaining benefits two-fold: mimicry AND thermoregulation? Why not?

-Cole

-Cole

GerryG Aug 16, 2010 03:20 AM

I've been continuing this discussion with another forum member and have also brought up the black milk, but I make a case against thermoregulation, based solely on the observation of my own black milk. At no point since I've had her has she liked temps above 72, in fact she seems to prefer things around 68. So I have to question why the color change would be beneficial for thermoregulation when the ambient temps in the natural range are within the snakes comfort zone day in and day out all year round. Why wouldn't they same thing happen for L.t.abnorma or andesiana both of which would benefit by such a change as much.

My thought was that natural selection is "forcing" a change from mimicry of the corals to that of the mussurana (Clelia clelia). Most of the black milks in the hobby today were mistakenly collected as that species if I recall correctly. IMO there are many benefits for this change in mimic models. I've also been told that some populations of Micrurus alleni in Panama and Costa Rica also undergo an ontogenic change from tricolored to black so perhaps the mimicry is just keeping pace with the times.

Sadly I have to stop there, work calls. Hope some of you will take the time to keep this going and perhaps express your own thoughts/theories on the subject.

Gerry

vjl4 Aug 16, 2010 10:39 AM

Great post.

I think we also have to consider what the degree of range overlap may have been in the past, when mimicry (if it is mimicry) evolved. During the Miocene (~24-5 million years ago) global temps were a lot warmer than today and many species that we think of as tropical had ranges extending into Canada. Since this is the time frame when the tricolor pattern evolved it would be nice to know what the range overlap was with corals then.

In order for the tricolor pattern to have evolved as a mimic of the coral they need to have had a range that overlapped during its evolution, otherwise the tricolor pattern evolved for something else (????) and was pre-adapted for use in mimicry once the range of milks and corals came together.

Best
Vinny

-----
“There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that whilst this planet has gone on cycling according to the fixed laws of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.” -C. Darwin, 1859

Natural Selection Reptiles

Sunherp Aug 16, 2010 11:37 AM

It sure is difficult to extrapolate the color patterns of the animals at that point, too.

-Cole

Sunherp Aug 16, 2010 11:14 AM

Excellent post - jives well with my own thoughts on the subject posted several threads below.

Certain members of the genus Micrurus also tend toward melanism. M. alleni, for example, is cited by Greene as a probably model for L. t. gaigeae as some populations start life with a tricolor scheme, then experience an ontogenic shift to melanism.

Also, many of the southern Latin American forms of L. triangulum display large amounts of black scale tipping, especially as adults. It's a short jump from a dark-phase polyzona to a gaigeae.

-Cole

Wild-collected L. t. polyzona - the photo exagerates the brightness of the red.
Image

Tony D Aug 16, 2010 11:38 AM

Once populations exhibiting mimicry became established, gene flow would carry the influence beyond the range of corals until environmental factors favor another color scheme.
-----
“Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.” Emmerson

WWW.TDSNAKES.BLOGSPOT.COM

Sunherp Aug 16, 2010 11:39 AM

100%.

-Cole

RG Aug 16, 2010 05:10 PM

What if the milk snake came before the coral? Are Corals just milk snake mimics?

I personally believe it could be just two species evolving separately and they just have similar colors and patterns...that enlist the same “startling” affect.
Bird says, "Hey that freakin banded snake scares the bird sheet out of me, I'm not going close to it". When two different species share a lot similar traits, it's known as morphological similarity.

I just don't think one species has anything to do with the other...they both have an unpleasant appearance to birds or whatever. I feel the milk snakes’ ( king snakes’, Tricolor Hogs, etc.) patterns has nothing to do with the Corals being venomous.
In other words…I feel the milk snakes (and the others) would look the same with or without Corals in the region (and the converse being true as well).

But as with most things...I'm sure this pattern and color similarity came to be by a myriad of other factors...not just one.

-Rusty





bobassetto Aug 16, 2010 05:34 PM

we all had a shot of jack daniels??????

RG Aug 17, 2010 07:22 AM

I prefer crown and sprite!

Tony D Aug 17, 2010 12:36 PM

u mix crown? Hieratic.
-----
“Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.” Emmerson

WWW.TDSNAKES.BLOGSPOT.COM

RG Aug 17, 2010 12:48 PM

my taste for it...actually I like it over ice...but I prefer it a tad diluted...but I'm young...give me time!

Dewars isn't too shabby either!

-R

Joe_M Aug 17, 2010 01:20 PM

I prefer Crown with a splash of ginger myself, but occasionally have it "on the rocks".

L.t.triangulum

-----
Joe

DMong Aug 16, 2010 08:18 PM

Could be very possible Rusty!

Hey, is that tricolor hypo there my female, or a sib?

Cool coral snakes there too, did you see those yourself here in Florida?

~Doug
-----
"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"

my website -serpentinespecialties.webs.com

RG Aug 17, 2010 07:26 AM

No, that isn't related to your tri-color hypo.

Yes, I took that shot of the Coral down in Micco area...he was just out sliding along...the temps. were perfect that day!

DMong Aug 17, 2010 10:27 AM

.
-----
"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"

my website -serpentinespecialties.webs.com

markg Aug 16, 2010 06:53 PM

I think the tricolor kings/milks should just become venemous. Then they can mimic themselves.
-----
Mark

ectimaeus Aug 17, 2010 10:37 AM

I believe I am more of the opinion that the multi color banded snakes are not mimics. I rather suspect it has to do with how they can evade attack. If one were to think about it, how many of you collectors have ever seen a coral snake or milk snake that was not moving or under something. My point is that if you put a bright colored coral snake or milk snake in the grass, how many people would see it unless it was moving. Here in the Texas hill country I am surprised at how many coral snakes are found living in neighborhoods. How can they survive with so many people? It has to be because they are not seen. If we, people, who have color vision cannot see them (unless in the open or moving), how difficult is it for animals to see them? There are colored banded snakes around the world. Are they all mimicing Coral Snakes.

With respect to L.t.geigae, I have collected them while I was stationed in Panama. They difinately thermoregulate. I have found them when the temps were in the 50's as long as the sun was out. When they are color banded (while small) they would be much more susceptible to predation so they need the camouflage. Once adult size they need to regulate temps for activity and digestion. The amount of animals large enough to predate them drastically reduces so they do not need the camouflage as much.

I am not trying to discount all the "scientific" evidence that has been produced over the years by all of the scholars out there. I am only pointing out my own observations in the field and expressing my ideas. But, I am skeptical about ideas that are said without real evidence, someone writing a "scientific looking" paper, then expecting everyone to buy into it. It is good we have this sort of forum for us to put our views out there.

Happy Herping.

ECTimaeus

markg Aug 17, 2010 01:34 PM

I'm with you here, or, at least of the mindset that there is really no way to know if mimicry has everything, something or nothing to do with the tricolor pattern. Neat theories for sure, worth disussing, just hard to prove one way or the other.
-----
Mark

Sunherp Aug 18, 2010 12:46 PM

tend to be (mostly) restricted to the Americas and Southeast Asia. Colorful Elapids (Micrurus, Micruroides, and Leptomicrurus here, and Calliophis in Asia) and similarly patterned Colubrids (Lampropeltis, Pliocercus, etc., here, and Oreocryptophis in Asia) make an awefully convincing argument for at least some degree of mimicry.

-Cole

ECTimaeus Aug 18, 2010 03:27 PM

So, when was the last time anyone saw a coral snake in California, Washington, Oregon, Utah, Montana, South Dakota, New Jersey, or anywhere north of Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma, Gulf Coast states or southern Alantic States. Maybe coral snake distribution used to overlap Lampropeltis locations and then receded to their present day distribution leaving the "mimics" behind by themselves. A more plausable hypothsis might be that the non venomous snakes developed the bright colors to scare predators and not get eaten. The venomous snakes then saw that the non venomous snakes were not being eaten so they decided to change their colors so they would not be eaten. I am sure we are all aware that even venomous snakes get eaten by something, right. Even the highly venomous neurotoxic snakes get eaten by monitors. Birds have developed ways to beat venomous snakes to death before eating them. Mongooses have speed and hair to prevent them from being bitten, cats use quickness and do eat even vipers and pit vipers. I think that any animal that has evolved to eat snakes, or learned how, will do so no matter what color they are and will take the same precautions while doing so to protect themselves in the process.

Makes me wonder though about snake eaters. Has anyone ever had a CA king eat a zonota, or a Sonoran King eat a Mexican Milk, or an Indigo eat any tri color. Fortunately I have not. But, I would bet you a dollar to a donut that they will. Now, try putting a coral snake in with any of those snakes and watch the outcome. The kingsnakes will eat their a$$ out trying to get totally away from a coral snake. Has to be more than the color because I do not think they have the ability to differentiate red touching yellow or red touching black.

Wait a minute here, I think I talked my way back to my original hypothosis. Must have something to to with evolving for some other reason than "mimic". I think the only animal out there that relies on sight and is scared by colors is us dumb humans because of things (right or wrong) we are taught or learn. Animals have much better senses they use to determine danger. But, you will have to take my opinion for what it is worth because I do not have the AA, BS, MS, PhD, or LSMFT behind my name.

ECTimaeus

Sunherp Aug 18, 2010 03:46 PM

are some of what had been discussed in this thread and one I started several days ago. The migratory patterns of predatory birds (Jays, Cardinals, etc.) overlap large portions of the tricolored Lampropeltis species' ranges. The parts that are only marginally (or not at all) covered by the birds' migratory pattern could maintain a tricolored pattern simply by gene flow. Birds see colors quite well and some species have been reliably demonstrated to avoid tricolored snakes and snake-like objects - even when captive-raised without a natural parent from which to learn fear behavior. I'm not trying to discount your thoughts, just wanting reiterate what we've been discussing for the past few days.

Do I support some of the mimicry hypotheses? Yeah, because they're the most plausable and well supported ideas I've seen put forth. Could that change with the presentation of reliable contrary information? Oh, yeah.

-Cole

ECTimaeus Aug 18, 2010 04:53 PM

Not wanting to sound dense on my part, but what do mimic snakes have to fear from Blue jays, cardinals or other migrating non-snake-eating birds? The birds that the snakes should worry about are the Roadrunners, hawks, owls, and even turkeys. Bet the colors do not stop them. It would appear that you are putting a lot of stock in something that has not been even remotely proven.

ECTimaeus

Sunherp Aug 18, 2010 05:27 PM

But those birds DO eat snakes. As do a large number of other migratory Passerines, Herons, Cranes, Kestrels and other birds which spend a large amount of time in Latin America. Our Pinon Jays (Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus), Grackles, and Magpies (Pica) are hell on snakes.

-Cole

vjl4 Aug 19, 2010 10:59 AM

Actually there is really good evidence that the mimics are attacked by predators less often when they co-occur with the model.

For example, one study found that plasticine models of L. t. elapsoides were attacked much less frequently than unpatterned plasticine models when the plasticine models were placed within of the range of Micrurus: ~8% of ringed replicas were attacked within the range of corals, but 65% were attacked when placed outside of the range of corals. Similar results were found for models of L. pyromelana, when placed within the range of Micruroides only 14% were attacked, but when placed outside the range 50% were attacked.

Here is the reference: Frequency-dependent Batesian mimicry

In a different study, these same authors also found that mimics resemble the model worse as you get farther away from where their ranges overlap. So, milks in N. Dakota are more imperfect models than Scarlet kings, for example. They also showed that the breakdown of mimicry probably reflected predator-mediated selection acting against individuals with good mimicry because they were more obvious to local avian predators. But, because of gene flow from the range of the good models into the range of the bad models it is difficult to loose the pattern and just be boring black or brown.

Selection overrides gene flow to break down maladaptive mimicry

Vinny

-----
“There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that whilst this planet has gone on cycling according to the fixed laws of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.” -C. Darwin, 1859

Natural Selection Reptiles

ECTimaeus Aug 19, 2010 11:34 AM

If one were to keep an open mind, let me offer this. First lets ask the question, if a coral snake is venomous why would it need to have the colors to protect itself by warning? If we presume that it does not need the color to protect itself then what would the colors be for? Since we do know how difficult it is to actually see tri-colored snakes when they are not moving, maybe it actually has more to do with hiding than somehow the animals trying to look like something else. Natural selection and evolution probably has more to do with environment and breeding with those animals that make it through predation. So, using the idea that the genes move out of the range of the venomous snake, one would have to make a huge leap assumption that enough of them crossed/migrated thousands of miles out of the venomous range and then those genes to become dominant.

A much more swallowable theory might be that the coral snakes evolved their colors the same way the other tri-color snakes did. Based on environment and the need to survive predation. If the colors are a part of their hiding capability would it not behoove any of the species to evolve alike? We see that sort of evolution around the world. We see horned lizards in NA and Horned Devils in Australia. We see pit vipers (ground and arboreal) in New World and Vipers (ground and arboreal)in the Old World. Animals evolve to fill a niche and many of them look alike even though they are not the same specie.

Cannot say I am sold 100%on either theory, but lean more toward the camouflage since it serves all tri-colored snakes.

ECTimaeus

vjl4 Aug 19, 2010 11:51 AM

"First lets ask the question, if a coral snake is venomous why would it need to have the colors to protect itself by warning? If we presume that it does not need the color to protect itself then what would the colors be for? "

Venomous snakes dont use venom for protection, but for predation. The color evolved to let predators know that if they attack there is a bad consequence. Why bother getting into a fight and getting hurt when you can advertise to you attacker they wont win and even if they did it wouldn't be worth it in the end?

"So, using the idea that the genes move out of the range of the venomous snake, one would have to make a huge leap assumption that enough of them crossed/migrated thousands of miles out of the venomous range and then those genes to become dominant."

Thats not actually a huge leap in assumption, its not an assumption at all that. Its already been shown that males migrate away from their mothers home range, not thousands of miles of course, but maybe 10s of miles. Mate and repeat and now you've migrated 20miles. Repeat for 10 generations and you've got the movement of genes across 1000 miles. Pretty fast.

Plus, milks are what is called a "ring species" meaning speciation is incomplete between adjacent subspecies so they can hybridize. That moves genes into different subspecies. When selection on gene is really strong, the further gene flow will take that gene away from the source of the selection.

Convinced you yet?

Vinny
-----
“There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that whilst this planet has gone on cycling according to the fixed laws of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.” -C. Darwin, 1859

Natural Selection Reptiles

ECTimaeus Aug 19, 2010 03:32 PM

I think the question is - Are you convinced yet? As I said before I am not (obviously) 100% sure as nobody is. Sorta like the chicken and the egg question.

I guess another issue about mimics for me is - what would trigger a mimic for defensive purpose? For example, there are lots of animals (especially insects) that have made adaptations (mimic)to move into closer proximity to a food source or host. That is something that happened over very long periods of time and for the purpose of getting close. How would a "blank" snake that would normally be the food source of a coral snake know to change its color pattern to mimic a coral when the "blank" snake would normally be thinking of nothing more that getting the heck away from the coral snake. Using the ideas above, would it not be more plausable that the coral snake was the "blank" snake that wanted to get closer to its food source so it changed its colors to match its prey? Also, looking at adaptations for protection throughout the animal kingdom would you not agree that the vast majority of evolved mutations involved developing better ways to hide? In the case of corals and other tri-colors, it would be fair to say that they are all very secretive and wish to go undetected. I know, now you would say the bright colors are a scare tactic. Again, we do not know for positive what a bird, cat, racoon, or any other animal besides ourselves sees when looking at the color schemes of tri-color snakes. Maybe even the most accute vision of birds cannot make out the shape of a tri-color snake in the grass, mulch, or twigs if it is not moving. I asked before, how many of us have ever found a tri-color lying still in cover? I know I have found milk snakes lying in the grass next to a rock I was going to flip that I did not see until I actually put my hand on the snake where I was grabbing the rock. DID NOT SEE THE SNAKE, and I was in snake looking mode. I am not color blind either. Just something else to ponder. LOL

ECTimaeus

Sunherp Aug 19, 2010 04:47 PM

As Vinny said, it's not a leap at all to think that gene flow maintains a certain phenotype. Gene flow doesn't mean that a snake from Texas is breeding with a snake from Nebraska. Not at all. Actually, it's quite the opposite - a snake from south Texas will breed with other snakes in its area. Since the habitat for triangulum is essentially contiguous, the populations blend and are not discrete from one another. For example, novel gene arising in OK can spread to central MT, unimpeded. The animals across the species' range have gene flow.

How would a "blank" snake that would normally be the food source of a coral snake know to change its color pattern to mimic a coral when the "blank" snake would normally be thinking of nothing more that getting the heck away from the coral snake. Using the ideas above, would it not be more plausible that the coral snake was the "blank" snake that wanted to get closer to its food source so it changed its colors to match its prey?

While it's an interesting thought, neither coral snakes nor Lampropeltis are very sight-oriented hunters. Further, evolution doesn't work by an organism "knowing" that a particular situation is better for its survival. Rather, when a mutation occurs that is either selectively neutral (doesn't provide advantage or disadvantage) or selectively beneficial, it will increase in frequency within that population. A beneficial mutation, one that increases the individual organism's reproductive success, will increase at an exponential rate within the population. This is how evolution by natural selection works.

Also, looking at adaptations for protection throughout the animal kingdom would you not agree that the vast majority of evolved mutations involved developing better ways to hide? In the case of corals and other tri-colors, it would be fair to say that they are all very secretive and wish to go undetected. I know, now you would say the bright colors are a scare tactic. Again, we do not know for positive what a bird, cat, racoon, or any other animal besides ourselves sees when looking at the color schemes of tri-color snakes. Maybe even the most accute vision of birds cannot make out the shape of a tri-color snake in the grass, mulch, or twigs if it is not moving. I asked before, how many of us have ever found a tri-color lying still in cover? I know I have found milk snakes lying in the grass next to a rock I was going to flip that I did not see until I actually put my hand on the snake where I was grabbing the rock. DID NOT SEE THE SNAKE, and I was in snake looking mode. I am not color blind either. Just something else to ponder. LOL

I can't agree that majority of "evolved mutations" (I believe you're referring to adaptations, here) are for better crypsis. That just isn't true. All selectively positive mutations which become established within a population (evolution) result in higher reproductive success for individuals which have such mutation. Sure, some mutations cause greater adaptive crypsis, but other make the animals bright, loud, or otherwise stand out. Sexual selection drives the extravagance of some male birds and fish. Their bright colors and long fins and plumage make them more susceptible to predation and other detrimental situations, so they're at a balance between what their females like and what will get them killed. Regarding toxic animals and their warning colors (called aposematic coloration), the animals benefit by being left alone when they ARE uncovered. Often, a snake or butterfly will be badly wounded by a indifferent predator, and therefore suffer in spite of their ability to defend themselves.

As for not being able to see the snake, I've seen LOTS of wild tricolors in habitats ranging from rolling prairie to mountain foothills to rocky semi-deserts to boulder-strewn canyons to sandhills to pine forest. I have never had them NOT stand out. That said, however, I can imagine that in certain circumstances this could be the case. Dappled light and reddish, fallen leaves could make for a difficult find. I'd love to see a photo of such a situation, if you've got one.

-Cole

ECTimaeus Aug 20, 2010 10:07 AM

Very nice scientific sounding response. So, if I understand you correctly adaptations that turn into permanent physiological changes after breeding are meant for survival of the species. You mention birds and feathers. Birds are very sight oriented, right? I can see adaptations to attract the opposite sex, male. You also mentioned that tri-colored snakes are not very sight oriented. So, if that is the case and they do not need to see the colors for mating or eating what else could it be for? I know, your answer should be either scare tactics or camouflage.

I do agree with you that a tri-colored snake lying on open ground, or at the base of a rock, in the sand, or under anything that you lift up to look under will STAND OUT. I wonder for each one of those that you found under those circumstances, how many you did not see. You will have a very hard time convincing me that the tri-colored snakes have survived and thrived because of their scare tactics. If that is the reason for their survival, how is it that all of the other species that do not have colors to scare predators away are still out there?

Do not take me wrong, I am not in total disagreement with the things you are saying and I am not discounting anything you are saying. My real rub in this whole thing is that there is so much assumed out there that is basically speculation, someone's opinion, someone justifying a written paper or grant to study something that would appear almost impossible to prove.

I admit that I fell into the mimic thinking even when I was Boy Scout (45 years ago) teaching other scouts and school kids about snakes. I used to show Mountian Kings and talk about how they were mimicing Coral Snakes. That is what I was told, made some sense to me, so that is what I taught. Over the years I have become more skeptical. I am not really trying to convince you that I am right and you are wrong. I am playing devil's advocate and hopefully getting some people to make their own observations and talk about them. That way maybe there will be some actual evidence brought forward to put this issue to bed. In reality, I do not think that will happen in my lifetime. Maybe one of our kids will be the one to prove this up, if we can only give them good information and teach them to not accept, blindly, what they are told. We know lots of things that people believe to be true about snakes that, factually, are not.

ECTimaeus

Sunherp Aug 20, 2010 10:41 AM

I'm not trying to put down your ideas, either. In fact, I just saw a photo on another forum dedicated to field herping that brought your camouflage tricolor idea into the light for me. There was a L. pyromelana in some leaf litter in Southeast Arizona and it was nearly impossible to see. Just incredible. Could the first line of defense be crypsis, and then aposematic coloration be the last resort once the animal is uncovered?

-Cole

ECTimaeus Aug 20, 2010 01:03 PM

Exactly where was the pic of the pyro. I would like to check it out.

ECTimaeus

Sunherp Aug 20, 2010 03:18 PM

You have e-mail!

vjl4 Aug 20, 2010 12:09 PM

I agree that people make a lot of assumptions about many things, and should critically evaluate what they read, hear, and are told. But, as scientists we are constantly critically evaluating our assumptions and the currently accepted theories.

This is how science advances and major break throughs are made. But, when the weight of the evidence falls in favor of a particular theory and against another we begin to accept it, and if correct, over time there is a preponderance of evidence to support it.

In science there is very little speculation, opinion, of justifications just so we can write a paper or get the next grant. We are generally extremely critical of others work, and do not tolerate those things. What appears impossible to prove rarely is with the right experiment.

So your right, we all should not accept blindly what we are told. At the same time we must recognize that we are not experts in every thing and must defer to experts in some things. I, for example, have no idea how my car runs. I mean I have a basic understanding of the internal combustion engine, but thats about it. I'm not going to take what my mechanic says is wrong with my care at face value, but after a second and third and fourth mechanic all come to a consensus on whats wrong with my car I accept that they know its the thermostat and my feeling that it was the radiator was a good educated guess but wrong. (Which worked in my favor last week because it was a lot cheaper to fix!)

Here is a great review of the evidence in favor of mimicry by Harry Greene from 1981. Its old, but good.

http://si-pddr.si.edu/dspace/bitstream/10088/4523/1/1981_Coral_snake_mimicry_Science.pdf

Best,
Vinny
-----
“There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that whilst this planet has gone on cycling according to the fixed laws of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.” -C. Darwin, 1859

Natural Selection Reptiles

ECTimaeus Aug 20, 2010 12:59 PM

Very good artical(paper) but, once again I do not see it making a provable point that the other tri-color snakes evolved to mimic coral snakes. Where is it documented by anyone or at anytime that the coral snakes came first? I do see a bunch of stuff about how their looks could be accounted for but, that still is not proof without knowing which came first. Maybe, that would sway me more toward your way of thinking. I still suggest this is some sort of converging evolution. Who is to say it is not as good for one specie as the other, much as the examples I gave you in previous posts. One might wonder why we do not go down this road with Bullsnakes, Ratsnakes, Kingsnakes and Rattlesnakes. Are they mimicing the Rattlesnake by having blotches and being able to buzz its tale. I think it is pretty well documented that Rattlesnakes are newer on the evolutionary ladder than non-venomous snakes. So, in that case who is mimicing who? Maybe not mimicing - maybe converging evolution of two different species to make the best for the survival of the specie. IMHO

ECTimaeus

vjl4 Aug 20, 2010 01:37 PM

Hey EC

Where is it documented by anyone or at anytime that the coral snakes came first?

Coral snakes originated about 26 million years ago is SE Asia and migrated into the new world shortly after. Lampropeltinine snakes colonized the New World ~24 million years ago, and the first snakes with tricolor patterns emerged in Lampropeltis, which as a genus is ~12 million years old. So corals are about twice as old as milks.

One might wonder why we do not go down this road with Bullsnakes, Ratsnakes, Kingsnakes and Rattlesnakes. Are they mimicing the Rattlesnake by having blotches and being able to buzz its tale. I think it is pretty well documented that Rattlesnakes are newer on the evolutionary ladder than non-venomous snakes. So, in that case who is mimicing who?

Actually, I think that Bullsnakes, Ratsnakes and some Kingsnakes maybe mimicing Rattlesnakes but have no real data for it. Bullsnakes, Ratsnakes and some Kingsnakes all rattle their tails in the substrate to produce sound when confronted, which may be a mimic of rattlesnakes. Rattlesnakes emerged about 24MYA too, and the Rattlesnake-Copperhead group is at least 28MY old. Pitophis is only 6-8 MY old, and Pituophis-Pantherophis is maybe 15-18 million years old. So the Rattlesnakes evolved way before them. Its pretty cool that one of the earliest lineages of "advanced" snakes evolved venom so early too.

Later,
Vinny
-----
“There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that whilst this planet has gone on cycling according to the fixed laws of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.” -C. Darwin, 1859

Natural Selection Reptiles

ECTimaeus Aug 20, 2010 01:05 PM

Hey, Bob A., why are you being so quiet on this subject????

Tiny

peters Aug 20, 2010 10:13 PM

CA king eat a zonata? Yes!
Back when I was a youngster (way, way back) I had a CA king and my very first zonata in a divided aquarium and the zonata dug under the divider to become a meal for the CA. When I came in the zonata was about 2/3 down the hatch. I pulled it out and I actualy cried. It took me another couple years to find another Mt.King.

theOLDherper
Pete

Site Tools