Mimicry vs. similarity: which resemblances between brood parasites and their hosts are mimetic and which are not?

Abstract

Mimicry is one of the most conspicuous and puzzling phenomena in nature. The best-known examples come from insects and brood parasitic birds. Unfortunately, the term ‘mimicry’ is used indiscriminately and inconsistently in the brood parasitic literature despite the obvious fact that similarities of eggs, nestlings and adults of brood parasites to their hosts could result from many different processes (phylogenetic constraint, predation, intraspecific arms-races, vocal imitation, exploitation of pre-existing preferences, etc.). In this note I wish to plead for a more careful use of the term. I review various processes leading to a similarity between propagules (both eggs and nestlings) of brood parasites and their hosts and stress that: (1) mimetic and non-mimetic similarities should be differentiated, (2) a mere similarity of host and parasite propagules provides no evidence for mimicry, (3) mimicry is more usefully understood as a (coevolutionary) process rather than an appearance, and (4) mimicry terminology should reflect the process which led to mimetic similarity. Accepting the mimicry hypothesis requires both the experimental approach and rejection of alternative hypotheses explaining similarities of host and parasite propagules. © 2005 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2005, 84, 69–78.