Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Mimicry and Meaning: Structure and Semiotics of Biological Mimicry pp 69–82Cite as

Different Perspectives in Mimicry System

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 916 Accesses

Part of the book series: Biosemiotics ((BSEM,volume 16))

Abstract

In the first half of this book, I have described the structure of mimicry, its diversity and typologies, given an overview of the semiotics of mimicry and analysed the relationship between mimicry and iconicity . In other words, I have analysed mimicry basically as a static structure or system with a shifting focus on its different aspects. In the present chapter, I will change the perspective and predominantly analyse dynamic issues: how mimicry as a structure operates as approached from the positions of the mimic, the model and the receiver, how they act to fit into the mimicry system, and what the different strategies are that they can use to cope with the other participants in mimicry.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In most cases, representamens in mimicry are mutually exclusive, but there are also examples where it is possible to combine different interpretants for using the iconic reference with a new communicative function. Such processes will be discussed in more detail in Sect. 9.2 “Mimicry and semiotic scaffolding”.

References

  • Ahnesjö, J., & Forsman, A. (2006). Differential habitat selection by pygmy grasshopper color morphs, interactive effects of temperature and predator avoidance. Evolutionary Ecology, 20(3), 235–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates, H. W. (1862). Contributions to an insect fauna of the Amazon valley. Lepidoptera: Heliconidæ. Transactions of the Linnean Society. Zoology, 23, 495–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benson, W. W., Brown Jr., K. S., & Gilbert, L. E. (1975). Coevolution of plants and herbivores: Passion flower butterflies. Evolution, 29(4), 659–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blaisdell, M. (1982). Natural theology and nature’s disguises. Journal of the History of Biology, 15(2), 163–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brakefield, P. M., Kesbeke, F., & Koch, P. B. (1998). The regulation of phenotypic plasticity of eyespots in the butterfly Bicyclus anynana. The American Naturalist, 152(6), 853–860.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Briffa, M., Haskell, P., & Wilding, C. (2008). Behavioural colour change in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus: Reduced crypticity when the threat of predation is high. Behaviour, 145(7), 915–929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brower, J. V. Z. (1960). Experimental studies of mimicry. 4. The reactions of starlings to different proportions of models and mimics. American Naturalist, 94, 271–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brower, J. V. Z., & Brower, L. P. (1962). Experimental studies of mimicry. 6. The reaction of toads (Bufo terrestris) to honeybees (Apis mellifera) and their dronefly mimics (Eristalis vinetorum). American Naturalist, 96, 297–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caillois, R. (2003). Mimicry and legendary psychasthenia. In F. Claudine (Ed.), The edge of surrealism. A Roger Caillois reader (F. Claudine & C. Naish Trans., pp. 91–103). Durham/London: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cott, H. B. (1957). Adaptive coloration in animals. London: Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Waal, F. (1986). Deception in the natural communication of chimpanzees. In R. W. Mitchell & N. S. Thompson (Eds.), Deception: Perspectives on human and nonhuman deceit (pp. 221–244). New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endler, J. A. (1993). Some general comments on the evolution and design of animal communication systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 340, 215–225.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Franks, D. W., & Noble, J. (2004). Batesian mimics influence mimicry ring evolution. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 271(1535), 191–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goulson, D. (2000). Are insects flower constant because they use search image to find flowers? Oikos, 88(3), 547–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanlon, R. T., Watson, A. C., & Barbosa, A. A. (2010). “Mimic octopus” in the Atlantic: Flatfish mimicry and camouflage by Macrotritopus defilippi. The Biological Bulletin, 218(1), 15–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heiling, A. M., Chittka, L., Cheng, K., & Herberstein, M. E. (2005). Colouration in crab spiders: substrate choice and prey attraction. Journal of Experimental Biology, 208(10), 1785–1792.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hochkirch, A., Deppermann, J., & Gröning, J. (2008). Phenotypic plasticity in insects: The effects of substrate color on the coloration of two ground-hopper species. Evolution & Development, 10(3), 350–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmeyer J. (1995). The semiosic body-mind. In N. Tasca (Ed.), Cruzeiro Semiótico 22(25), 367–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huheey, J. E. (1964). Studies of warning coloration and mimicry IV. A mathematical model of model–mimic frequencies. Ecology, 45(1), 185–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, B., et al. (Eds.). (1995). Cassell concise English dictionary. London: Cassell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleisner, K., & Markoš, A. (2005). Semetic rings: Towards the new concept of mimetic resemblances. Theory in Biosciences, 123(3), 209–222.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kleisner, K., & Markoš, A. (2009). Mutual understanding and misunderstanding in biological systems mediated by self-representational meaning of organisms. Sign Systems Studies, 37(1/2), 299–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kopp, C., & Mills, B. (2002). Information warfare and evolution. Conference paper. In Proceedings of the 3rd Australian Information Warfare & Security Conference. Online: www.csse.monash.edu.au/~carlo/archive/PAPERS/_JIW-2002-2-CK-BIM-S.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowzan, T. (1992). Sémiologie du Théâtre. Paris: Nathan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krajewski, J. P., Bonaldo, R. M., Sazima, C., & Sazima, I. (2009). Octopus mimicking its follower reef fish. Journal of Natural History, 43(3-4), 185–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kull, K. (1992). Evolution and semiotics. In T. A. Sebeok, J. Umiker-Sebeok, & E. P. Young (Eds.), Biosemiotics: The Semiotic Web 1991 (pp. 221–233). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallet, J., & Gilbert Jr., L. E. (1995). Why are there so many mimicry rings? Correlations between habitat, behaviour and mimicry in Heliconius butterflies. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 55, 159–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallet, J., & Joron, M. (1999). Evolution of diversity in warning color and mimicry: Polymorphisms, shifting balance, and speciation. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 30, 201–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maran, T. (2003). Mimesis as a phenomenon of semiotic communication. Sign Systems Studies, 31(1), 191–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maran, T. (2008b). Mimikri semiootika [Semiotics of mimicry] (Tartu Ülikooli doktoritöid). Tartu: Tartu University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith, J., & Harper, D. G. C. (2003). Animal signals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrell, F. (1999). Living signs. Semiotica, 127(1/4), 453–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milani, L., Ghiselli, F., Pellecchia, M., Scali, V., & Passamonti, M. (2010). Reticulate evolution in stick insects: the case of Clonopsis (Insecta Phasmida). BMC Evolutionary Biology, 10, 258.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. W. (1986). A framework for discussing deception. In R. W. Mitchell & N. S. Thompson (Eds.), Deception: Perspectives on human and nonhuman deceit (pp. 3–40). New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, C. (1971b). Signs, language, and behavior. In C. Morris (Ed.), Writings on the general theory of signs (pp. 73–397). The Hague: Mouton.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, C. (1985). Sign and the act. In R. E. Innis (Ed.), Semiotics, an introductory anthology (pp. 179–189). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M. D. (1986). Large scale deception: Deceit by captive elephants? In R. W. Mitchell & N. S. Thompson (Eds.), Deception: Perspectives on human and nonhuman deceit (pp. 183–191). New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, L. A. (1983). Mimesis of bellflower (Campanula) by the red helleborine orchid Cephalanthera rubra. Nature, 305, 799–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, M. D., Finn, J., & Tregenza, T. (2001). Dynamic mimicry in an Indo-Malayan octopus. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 268(1478), 1755–1758.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (1990). Handbook of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, R. (1977). The ecology of brood parasitism in birds. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 8, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, R. B., Payne, L. L., Woods, J. L., & Sorenson, M. D. (2000). Imprinting and the origin of parasite–host species associations in brood-parasitic indigobirds, Vidua chalybeate. Animal Behaviour, 59(1), 69–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sargent, T. D. (1966). Background selections of geometrid and noctuid moths. Science, 154(3757), 1674–1675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sargent, T. D. (1969). Behavioral adaptations of cryptic moths. II. Experimental studies on bark-like species. Journal of the New York Entomological Society, 77, 75–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebeok, T. A. (1989). Iconicity. In T. A. Sebeok (Ed.), The sign and its masters (pp. 107–127). Lanham: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebeok, T. A. (1990a). Can animals lie? In T. A. Sebeok (Ed.), Essays in zoosemiotics, Monograph series of the Toronto semiotic circle 5 (pp. 93–97). Toronto: Toronto Semiotic Circle, Victoria College in the University of Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebeok, T. A. (1991c). The semiotic self. In T. A. Sebeok (Ed.), A sign is just a sign (pp. 36–40). Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebeok, T. A. (1994). Signs: An introduction to semiotics. Toronto/Buffalo: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebeok, T. A., & Danesi, M. (2000). The forms of meaning: Modeling systems theory and semiotic analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sharov, A. A. (1992). Biosemiotics: A functional-evolutionary approach to the analysis of the sense of information. In T. A. Sebeok, J. Umiker-Sebeok, & E. P. Young (Eds.), Biosemiotics: The semiotic web 1991 (pp. 345–373). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stachowicz, J. J., & Hay, M. E. (2000). Geographic variation in camouflage specialization by a decorator crab. The American Naturalist, 156(1), 59–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stjernfelt, F. (2001). A natural symphony? To what extent is Uexküll’s Bedeutungslehre actual for the semiotics of our time? Semiotica, 134(1/4), 79–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, E. J., & Li, D. (2009). Detritus decorations of an orb-weaving spider, Cyclosa mulmeinensis (Thorell): For food or camouflage? The Journal of Experimental Biology, 212, 1832–1839.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, L., & Tso, I.-M. (2009). A risky defence by a spider using conspicuous decoys resembling itself in appearance. Animal Behaviour, 78(2), 425–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Rüppel, G. (1986). A ‘lie’ as a directed message of the arctic fox (Alopex lagopus L.). In R. W. Mitchell & N. S. Thompson (Eds.), Deception: Perspectives on human and nonhuman deceit (pp. 177–181). New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Uexküll, J. (1982). The theory of meaning. Semiotica, 42(1), 25–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldbauer, G. P. (1988). Asyncrony between Batesian mimics and their models. In L. P. Brower (Ed.), Mimicry and the evolutionary process (pp. 103–121). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wedmann, S., Bradler, S., & Rust, J. (2007). The first fossil leaf insect: 47 million years of specialized cryptic morphology and behavior. PNAS, 104(2), 565–569.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wente, W. H., & Phillips, J. B. (2005). Microhabitat selection by the Pacific treefrog, Hyla regilla. Animal Behaviour, 70(2), 279–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens, D. (1978). Mimicry in plants. Evolutionary Biology, 11, 364–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamasaki, A., Shimizu, K., & Fujisaki, K. (2009). Effect of host plant part on larval body-color polymorphism in Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 102(1), 76–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Semiotics, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia

    Timo Maran

Authors
  1. Timo Maran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Maran, T. (2017). Different Perspectives in Mimicry System. In: Mimicry and Meaning: Structure and Semiotics of Biological Mimicry. Biosemiotics, vol 16. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50317-2_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation