We provide a formal account of an interface that bridges two different levels of dynamic processes manifested by mimicry: prey-prey interactions and predators' perception. Mimicry is a coevolutionary process between an animate selective agent and at least two similar organisms selected by agent's perception-driven actions. Attractor field model explains perceived similarity of forms by noting that in both human and animal cognition, morphologically intermediate forms are more likely to be perceived as belonging to rare rather than abundant forms. We formalize this model in terms of predators' perception space deformation using numerical simulations and argue that the probability of confusion between similar species creates pressure on the perception space, which in turn leads to inflation of regions of perception space with high density of species representations. Such inflation causes increased discrimination between species by a predator, which implies that adaptive mimicry could initially emerge more easily among atypical species because they do not need the same level of similarity to the model. We provide a theoretical instrument to conceptualize interdependence between objective measurable matrices and perceived matrices of the same external reality. We believe that our framework leads to a more precise understanding of the evolution of mimicry.

Center for Theoretical Study Charles University and Czech Academy of Sciences Jilská 1 Prague 1 110 00 Czech Republic

Department of Philosophy and History of Science Faculty of Science Charles University Viničná 7 Praha 2 128 00 Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Goodwin BC. 1963. Temporal organization in cells. A dynamic theory of cellular control processes. New York, NY: Academic Press.

Van Der Pol B, Van Der Mark J. 1928. LXXII. The heartbeat considered as a relaxation oscillation, and an electrical model of the heart. Lond. Edinburgh Dublin Phil. Mag. J. Sci. 6, 763-775. (10.1080/14786441108564652) DOI

Hodgkin AL, Huxley AF. 1952. A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve. J. Physiol. 117, 500-544. (10.1113/jphysiol.1952.sp004764) PubMed DOI PMC

Gierer A, Meinhardt H. 1972. A theory of biological pattern formation. Kybernetik 12, 30-39. (10.1007/BF00289234) PubMed DOI

Turing AM. 1952. The chemical basis of morphogenesis. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 237, 37-72. (10.1098/rstb.1952.0012) PubMed DOI PMC

Newman SA, Bhat R. 2009. Dynamical patterning modules: a ‘pattern language’ for development and evolution of multicellular form. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 53, 693-705. (10.1387/ijdb.072481sn) PubMed DOI

Skarda CA, Freeman WJ. 1987. How brains make chaos in order to make sense of the world. Behav. Brain Sci. 10, 161-195. (10.1017/S0140525X00047336) DOI

Tank DW, Hopfield JJ. 1987. Collective computation in neuronlike circuits. Sci. Am. 257, 104-115. PubMed

Halloy J, et al. . 2007. Social integration of robots into groups of cockroaches to control self-organized choices. Science 318, 1155-1158. (10.1126/science.1144259) PubMed DOI

Lotka AJ. 1920. Analytical note on certain rhythmic relations in organic systems. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 6, 410-415. (10.1073/pnas.6.7.410) PubMed DOI PMC

Volterra V. 1928. Variations and fluctuations of the number of individuals in animal species living together. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 3, 3-51. (10.1093/icesjms/3.1.3) DOI

Bathiany S, Dijkstra H, Crucifix M, Dakos V, Brovkin V, Williamson MS, Lenton TM, Scheffer M. 2016. Beyond bifurcation: using complex models to understand and predict abrupt climate change. Dyn. Stat. Clim. Syst. 1, dzw004. (10.1093/climsys/dzw004) DOI

Gjuvsland AB, Vik JO, Beard DA, Hunter PJ, Omholt SW. 2013. Bridging the genotype–phenotype gap: what does it take? J. Physiol. 591, 2055-2066. (10.1113/jphysiol.2012.248864) PubMed DOI PMC

Bruni LE, Giorgi F. 2015. Towards a heterarchical approach to biology and cognition. Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol. 119, 481-492. (10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2015.07.005) PubMed DOI

Galic N, Sullivan LL, Grimm V, Forbes VE. 2018. When things don't add up: quantifying impacts of multiple stressors from individual metabolism to ecosystem processing. Ecol. Lett. 21, 568-577. (10.1111/ele.12923) PubMed DOI

García-Callejas D, Molowny-Horas R, Araújo MB. 2018. Multiple interactions networks: towards more realistic descriptions of the web of life. Oikos 127, 5-22. (10.1111/oik.04428) DOI

Bates HW. 1862. XXXII. Contributions to an insect fauna of the Amazon valley. Lepidoptera: Heliconidae. Trans. Linn. Soc. Lond. 23, 495-566. (10.1111/j.1096-3642.1860.tb00146.x DOI

Müller F. 1878. Über die vortheile der mimicry bei schmetterlingen. Zool. Anz. 1, 54-55.

Wallace AR. 1889. Darwinism: an exposition of the theory of natural selection with some of its applications. London, UK: Macmillan & Co.

Wickler W. 1965. Mimicry and the evolution of animal communication. Nature 208, 519-521. (10.1038/208519a0) DOI

Wickler W. 1968. Mimicry in plants and animals. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Holmgren NMA, Enquist M. 1999. Dynamics of mimicry evolution. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 66, 145-158. (10.1111/j.1095-8312.1999.tb01880.x) DOI

Joron M, Mallet JLB. 1998. Diversity in mimicry: paradox or paradigm? Trends Ecol. Evol. 13, 461-466. (10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01483-9) PubMed DOI

Akcali CK, Kikuchi DW, Pfennig DW. 2018. Coevolutionary arms races in Batesian mimicry? A test of the chase-away hypothesis. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 124, 668-676. (10.1093/biolinnean/bly075) DOI

Kikuchi DW, Pfennig DW. 2013. Imperfect mimicry and the limits of natural selection. Q. Rev. Biol. 88, 297-315. (10.1086/673758) PubMed DOI

Font E. 2019. Mimicry, camouflage and perceptual exploitation: the evolution of deception in nature. Biosemiotics 12, 7-24. (10.1007/s12304-018-9339-6) DOI

Guilford T, Dawkins MS. 1991. Receiver psychology and the evolution of animal signals. Anim. Behav. 42, 1-14. (10.1016/s0003-3472(05)80600-1) DOI

Grim T. 2013. Mimicry, signalling and co-evolution: commentary on Wolfgang Wickler, ’Understanding mimicry’, with special reference to vocal mimicry. Ethology 119, 270-277. (10.1111/eth.12067) DOI

Komárek S. 2003. Mimicry, aposematism and related phenomena: mimetism in nature and the history of its study. Munich, Germany: Lincom Europa.

Van Someren VGL, Jackson THE. 1959. Some comments on protective resemblance amongst African Lepidoptera (Rhopalocera). J. Lepid. Soc. 13, 121.

Fisher RA. 1930. The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.

Franks DW, Ruxton GD, Sherratt TN. 2009. Warning signals evolve to disengage Batesian mimics. Evol. Int. J. Org. Evol. 63, 256-267. (10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00509.x) PubMed DOI

Gavrilets S, Hastings A. 1998. Coevolutionary chase in two-species systems with applications to mimicry. J. Theor. Biol. 191, 415-427. (10.1006/jtbi.1997.0615) PubMed DOI

Brejcha J. 2019. Viper as a Batesian model: its role in an ecological community. Biosemiotics 12, 25-38. (10.1007/s12304-019-09347-x) DOI

Hotová SK, Exnerová A, Kopečková M, Štys P. 2013. How do predators learn to recognize a mimetic complex: experiments with naive great tits and aposematic Heteroptera. Ethology 119, 814-830. (10.1111/eth.12121) DOI

Mallet J. 1999. Causes and consequences of a lack of coevolution in Müllerian mimicry. Evol. Ecol. 13, 777-806. (10.1023/a:1011060330515 DOI

Speed MP. 1999. Batesian, quasi-Batesian or Müllerian mimicry? Theory and data in mimicry research. Evol. Ecol. 13, 755-776. (10.1023/a:1010871106763) DOI

Sherratt TN. 2008. The evolution of Müllerian mimicry. Naturwissenschaften 95, 681-695. (10.1007/s00114-008-0403-y) PubMed DOI PMC

Kleisner K. 2008. Homosemiosis, mimicry and superficial similarity: notes on the conceptualization of independent emergence of similarity in biology. Theory Biosci. 127, 15-21. (10.1007/s12064-007-0019-3) PubMed DOI

Kleisner K, Saribay SA. 2019. The dual nature of mimicry: organismal form and beholder's eye. Biosemiotics 12, 79-98. (10.1007/s12304-018-9333-z) DOI

Kleisner K. 2010. Re-semblance and re-evolution: paramorphism and semiotic co-option may explain the re-evolution of similar phenotypes. Sign Syst. Stud. 38, 378-392. (10.12697/sss.2010.38.1-4.13) DOI

Kleisner K. 2011. Perceive, co-opt, modify, and live! Organism as a centre of experience. Biosemiotics 4, 223-241. (10.1007/s12304-010-9093-x) DOI

Kleisner K, Markoš A. 2005. Semetic rings: towards the new concept of mimetic resemblances. Theory Biosci. 123, 209-222. (10.1016/j.thbio.2004.09.001) PubMed DOI

Maran T. 2017. Mimicry and meaning: structure and semiotics of biological mimicry. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

Arak A, Enquist M. 1993. Hidden preferences and the evolution of signals. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 340, 207-213. (10.1098/rstb.1993.0059) DOI

Schaefer HM, Ruxton GD. 2009. Deception in plants: mimicry or perceptual exploitation? Trends Ecol. Evol. 24, 676-685. (10.1016/j.tree.2009.06.006) PubMed DOI

Nelson XJ. 2014. Evolutionary implications of deception in mimicry and masquerade. Curr. Zool. 60, 6-15. (10.1093/czoolo/60.1.6) DOI

Tversky A. 1977. Features of similarity. Psychol. Rev. 84, 327. (10.1037/0033-295X.84.4.327) DOI

Medin DL, Goldstone RL, Gentner D. 1993. Respects for similarity. Psychol. Rev. 100, 254. (10.1037/0033-295x.100.2.254) DOI

Smith FW, Schyns PG. 2009. Smile through your fear and sadness: transmitting and identifying facial expression signals over a range of viewing distances. Psychol. Sci. 20, 1202-1208. (10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02427.x) PubMed DOI

Davidoff J, Davies I, Roberson D. 1999. Colour categories in a stone-age tribe. Nature 398, 203-204. (10.1038/18335) PubMed DOI

Heron-Delaney M, Anzures G, Herbert JS, Quinn PC, Slater AM, Tanaka JW, Lee K, Pascalis O. 2011. Perceptual training prevents the emergence of the other race effect during infancy. PLoS ONE 6, e19858. (10.1371/journal.pone.0019858) PubMed DOI PMC

Tanaka JW. 2001. The entry point of face recognition: evidence for face expertise. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 130, 534. (10.1037/0096-3445.130.3.534) PubMed DOI

Sy JL, Giesbrecht B. 2009 Target–target similarity and the attentional blink: task-relevance matters! Vis. Cogn. 17, 307-317. (10.1080/13506280802349746) PubMed DOI PMC

Dawkins MS. 1995. How do hens view other hens? The use of lateral and binocular visual fields in social recognition. Behaviour 132, 591-606. (10.1163/156853995×00225) DOI

Ryan M. 2019. A taste for the beautiful: the evolution of attraction. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Knudsen EI. 2020. Evolution of neural processing for visual perception in vertebrates. J. Comp. Neurol. 17, 2888-2901. (10.1002/cne.24871) PubMed DOI PMC

Breakspear M. 2017. Dynamic models of large-scale brain activity. Nat. Neurosci. 20, 340-352. (10.1038/nn.4497) PubMed DOI

Rabinovich MI, Varona P. 2011. Robust transient dynamics and brain functions. Front. Comput. Neurosci. 5, 24. (10.3389/fncom.2011.00024) PubMed DOI PMC

Kringelbach ML, Cruzat J, Cabral J, Knudsen GM, Carhart-Harris R, Whybrow PC, Logothetis NK, Deco G. 2020. Dynamic coupling of whole-brain neuronal and neurotransmitter systems. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 9566-9576. (10.1073/pnas.1921475117) PubMed DOI PMC

Freeman WJ. 1987. Simulation of chaotic EEG patterns with a dynamic model of the olfactory system. Biol. Cybern. 56, 139-150. (10.1007/BF00317988) PubMed DOI

King CC. 1991. Fractal and chaotic dynamics in nervous systems. Prog. Neurobiol. 36, 279-308. (10.1016/0301-0082(91)90003-J) PubMed DOI

Logothetis NK, Pauls J, Augath M, Trinath T, Oeltermann A. 2001. Neurophysiological investigation of the basis of the fMRI signal. Nature 412, 150-157. (10.1038/35084005) PubMed DOI

Zhang Z, Bai L, Cong L, Yu P, Zhang T, Shi W, Li F, Du J, Wang K.. 2021. Imaging volumetric dynamics at high speed in mouse and zebrafish brain with confocal light field microscopy. Nat. Biotechnol. 39, 74-83. (10.1038/s41587-020-0628-7) PubMed DOI

Feierstein CE, Portugues R, Orger MB. 2015. Seeing the whole picture: a comprehensive imaging approach to functional mapping of circuits in behaving zebrafish. Neuroscience 296, 26-38. (10.1016/j.neuroscience.2014.11.046) PubMed DOI

Ju H, Bassett DS. 2020. Dynamic representations in networked neural systems. Nat. Neurosci. 23, 908-917. (10.1038/s41593-020-0653-3) PubMed DOI

Marques JC, Li M, Schaak D, Robson DN, Li JM. 2020. Internal state dynamics shape brainwide activity and foraging behaviour. Nature 577, 239-243. (10.1038/s41586-019-1858-z) PubMed DOI

Saxena S, Cunningham JP. 2019. Towards the neural population doctrine. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 55, 103-111. (10.1016/j.conb.2019.02.002) PubMed DOI

Schyns PG, Zhan J, Jack RE, Ince RAA. 2020. Revealing the information contents of memory within the stimulus information representation framework. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 375, 20190705. (10.1098/rstb.2019.0705) PubMed DOI PMC

Zhan J, Ince RAA, Van Rijsbergen N, Schyns PG.. 2019. Dynamic construction of reduced representations in the brain for perceptual decision behavior. Curr. Biol. 29, 319-326. (10.1101/284158) PubMed DOI PMC

Tanaka JW, Corneille O. 2007. Typicality effects in face and object perception: further evidence for the attractor field model. Percept. Psychophys. 69, 619-627. (10.3758/BF03193919) PubMed DOI

Tanaka J, Giles M, Kremen S, Simon V. 1998. Mapping attractor fields in face space: the atypicality bias in face recognition. Cognition 68, 199-220. (10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00048-1) PubMed DOI

Krumhansl CL. 1978. Concerning the applicability of geometric models to similarity data: the interrelationship between similarity and spatial density. Psychol. Rev. 85, 445-463. (10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.445) DOI

Valentine T, Lewis MB, Hills PJ. 2016. Face-space: a unifying concept in face recognition research. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 69, 1996-2019. (10.1080/17470218.2014.990392) PubMed DOI

Valentine T, Ferrara A. 1991. Typicality in categorization, recognition and identification: evidence from face recognition. Br. J. Psychol. 82, 87-102. (10.1111/j.2044-8295.1991.tb02384.x) DOI

Kleisner K, Pokorný Š, Saribay SA. 2019. Toward a new approach to cross-cultural distinctiveness and typicality of human faces: the cross-group typicality/distinctiveness metric. Front. Psychol. 10, 124. (10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00124) PubMed DOI PMC

Worthen JB, Garcia-Rivas G, Green CR, Vidos RA. 2000. Tests of a cognitive-resource-allocation account of the bizarreness effect. J. Gen. Psychol. 127, 117-144. (10.1080/00221300009598573) PubMed DOI

Einstein GO, McDaniel MA. 1987. Distinctiveness and the mnemonic benefits of bizarre imagery. In Imagery and related mnemonic processes (eds McDaniel MA, Pressley M), pp. 78-102. New York, NY: Springer.

Tamarit I, Cuesta JA, Dunbar RIM, Sánchez A. 2018. Cognitive resource allocation determines the organization of personal networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 115, 8316-8321. (10.1073/pnas.1719233115) PubMed DOI PMC

R Core Team. 2017. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

Akima H. 1996. Algorithm 761: scattered-data surface fitting that has the accuracy of a cubic polynomial. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 22, 362-371. (10.1145/232826.232856) DOI

Akima H, Gebhardt A, Petzoldt T, Maechler M. 2013. akima: Interpolation of irregularly spaced data. R Packag. version 0.5–11. See http//CRAN.R-project.org/package=akima.

Horn RA, Johnson CR. 2012. Matrix analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Gilbert F. 2004. The evolution of imperfect mimicry in hoverflies. In Insect evolutionary ecology (eds Fellowes MDE, Holloway GJ, Rolff J), pp. 231-288. Delémont, Switzerland: CABI.

Johnstone RA. 2002. The evolution of inaccurate mimics. Nature 418, 524-526. (10.1038/nature00845) PubMed DOI

Sherratt TN. 2002. The evolution of imperfect mimicry. Behav. Ecol. 13, 821-826. (10.1093/beheco/13.6.821) DOI

Ihalainen E, Lindström L, Mappes J. 2007. Investigating Müllerian mimicry: predator learning and variation in prey defences. J. Evol. Biol. 20, 780-791. (10.1111/j.1420-9101.2006.01234.x) PubMed DOI

Rowland HM, Ihalainen E, Lindström L, Mappes J, Speed MP. 2007. Co-mimics have a mutualistic relationship despite unequal defences. Nature 448, 64-67. (10.1038/nature05899) PubMed DOI

Speed MP, Alderson NJ, Hardman C, Ruxton GD. 2000. Testing Müllerian mimicry: an experiment with wild birds. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 267, 725-731. (10.1098/rspb.2000.1063) PubMed DOI PMC

Rabosky ARD, Cox CL, Rabosky DL, Holmes IA, Feldman A, McGuire JA. 2016. Coral snakes predict the evolution of mimicry across New World snakes. Nat. Commun. 7, 11484. (10.1038/ncomms11484) PubMed DOI PMC

Pfennig DW. 2016. Evolutionary biology: to mimicry and back again. Nature 534, 184. (10.1038/nature18441) PubMed DOI

Jazayeri M, Afraz A. 2017. Navigating the neural space in search of the neural code. Neuron 93, 1003-1014. (10.1016/j.neuron.2017.02.019) PubMed DOI

Montgomerie R. 2006. Analyzing colors. In Bird coloration: mechanisms and measurements (eds Hill G, McGraw K), pp. 90-147. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Stoddard MC, Prum RO. 2011. How colorful are birds? Evolution of the avian plumage color gamut. Behav. Ecol. 22, 1042-1052. (10.1093/beheco/arr088 DOI

Pérez de Lanuza G, Font E, Monterde JL. 2013. Using visual modelling to study the evolution of lizard coloration: sexual selection drives the evolution of sexual dichromatism in lacertids. J. Evol. Biol. 26, 1826-1835. (10.1111/jeb.12185 PubMed DOI

Ehrenstein WH, Ehrenstein A. 1999. Psychophysical methods. In Modern techniques in neuroscience research (eds Windhorst U, Johansson H), pp. 1211-1241. Berlin, Germany: Springer.

Loffler G, Yourganov G, Wilkinson F, Wilson HR. 2005. fMRI evidence for the neural representation of faces. Nat. Neurosci. 8, 1386-1391. (10.1038/nn1538) PubMed DOI

Jack RE, Schyns PG. 2017. Toward a social psychophysics of face communication. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 68, 269-297. (10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044242) PubMed DOI

Schyns PG, Ince RAA. 2019. Making the brain-activity-to-information leap using a novel framework: Stimulus Information Representation (SIR). bioRxiv, 658682. (10.1101/658682) DOI

de Polavieja GG, Orger MB. 2018. Social behavior: a neural circuit for social behavior in zebrafish. Curr. Biol. 28, R828-R830. (10.1016/j.cub.2018.06.065) PubMed DOI

Symptomic Mimicry Between SARS-CoV-2 and the Common Cold Complex

Zobrazit více v PubMed

figshare
10.6084/m9.figshare.c.5354183