FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   403   404   405   406   407   408   409   410   411   412   413   414   415   416   417   418   419   420   421   422   423   424   425   426   427  
428   429   430   431   432   433   434   435   436   437   438   439   440   441   442   443   444   445   446   447   448   449   450   451   452   >>   >|  
and the majority of naturalists have followed this convenient arrangement. In cryptic resemblance an animal resembles some object of no interest to its enemy (or prey), and in so doing is concealed; in mimicry an animal resembles some other animal which is specially disliked by its enemy, or some object which is specially attractive to its prey, and in so doing becomes conspicuous. Some naturalists have considered mimicry to include all superficial likenesses between animals, but such a classification would group together resemblances which have widely different uses. (1) The resemblance of a mollusc to the coral on which it lives, or an external parasite to the hair or skin of its host, would be _procryptic_; (2) that between moths which resemble lichen, _syncryptic_; (3) between distasteful insects, _synaposematic_; (4) between the Insectivor mole and the Rodent mole-rat, _syntechnic_; (5) the essential element in mimicry is that it is a false warning (pseud-aposematic) or false recognition (pseud-episematic) character. Some have considered that mimicry indicates resemblance to a moving object; but apart from the non-mimetic likenesses between animals classified above, there are ordinary cryptic resemblances to drifting leaves, swaying bits of twig, &c., while truly mimetic resemblances are often specially adapted for the attitude of rest. Many use the term mimicry to include synaposematic as well as pseudo-sematic resemblances, calling the former "Mullerian," the latter "Batesian," mimicry. The objection to this grouping is that it takes little account of the deceptive element which is essential in mimicry. In synaposematic colouring the warning is genuine, in pseud-aposematic it is a sham. The term mimicry has led to much misunderstanding from the fact that in ordinary speech it implies deliberate imitation. The production of mimicry in an individual animal has no more to do with consciousness or "taking thought" than any of the other processes of growth. Protective mimicry is here defined as an advantageous and superficial resemblance of one animal to another, which latter is specially defended so as to be disliked or feared by the majority of enemies of the groups to which both belong--a resemblance which appeals to the sense of sight, sometimes to that of hearing, and rarely to smell, but does not extend to deep-seated characters except when the superficial likeness is affected by them. _Mutatis mutandis_ this def
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   403   404   405   406   407   408   409   410   411   412   413   414   415   416   417   418   419   420   421   422   423   424   425   426   427  
428   429   430   431   432   433   434   435   436   437   438   439   440   441   442   443   444   445   446   447   448   449   450   451   452   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

mimicry

 

animal

 

resemblance

 

specially

 
resemblances
 
superficial
 

synaposematic

 

object

 

likenesses

 

include


ordinary

 

animals

 

aposematic

 

naturalists

 

considered

 

resembles

 

cryptic

 
essential
 

element

 

disliked


mimetic
 
warning
 

majority

 

implies

 

individual

 

production

 

deliberate

 
imitation
 

grouping

 

objection


Batesian

 
calling
 

Mullerian

 
account
 

deceptive

 

misunderstanding

 
colouring
 
genuine
 

speech

 

extend


rarely

 

hearing

 

seated

 

characters

 

Mutatis

 

mutandis

 
affected
 

likeness

 
sematic
 

appeals