IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v15y2004i6p982-987.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ultraviolet reflection and predation risk in diurnal and nocturnal Lepidoptera

Author

Listed:
  • Anne Lyytinen
  • Leena Lindström
  • Johanna Mappes

Abstract

According to our extensive data on Lepidoptera (883 species), UV wing patterns are almost three times more common in nocturnal than in diurnal Lepidoptera. This might be due to predation, because the primary diurnal predators, birds, utilize UV light in foraging and even prefer UV-reflecting prey. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a field experiment with tethered living moths whose wings were artificially manipulated to reflect (UV+, reflection at UV wavelength: 15%) or absorb (UV - ) UV light, keeping longer wavelengths identical. Thus, any difference found in survival rates would be the result of the difference in wing patterns in UV spectrum. Significantly more UV+ moths than UV - ones were eaten in the daytime, but no difference in predation rates could be detected when moths were exposed to nocturnal predators. The different survival rates indicate that UV reflection increased predation risk by visually orienting diurnal predators. The lack of difference at night arises from the lack of UV-sensitive predators. UV wing patterns, even if they are important in intraspecies communication, seem to be costly to diurnal Lepidoptera by attracting predators. Copyright 2004.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne Lyytinen & Leena Lindström & Johanna Mappes, 2004. "Ultraviolet reflection and predation risk in diurnal and nocturnal Lepidoptera," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 15(6), pages 982-987, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:15:y:2004:i:6:p:982-987
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arh102
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:15:y:2004:i:6:p:982-987. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.