ISRAEL JOURNAL OF ENTOMOLOGY, Vol. 39, 2009, pp. 159–163

Ant mimicry by Passiflora flowers?
Simcha Lev-Yadun
Department of Science Education—Biology, University of Haifa—Oranim,Tivon 36006, Israel. E-mail: levyadun@research.haifa.ac.il

ABSTRACT
Mutualism between plants and the ants that defend them from herbivory isa well-known phenomenon. Because of ant aggression, ant mimicry as adefense against predation is very common in the animal kingdom, and has already been suggested as a type of visual anti-herbivory defensive coloration inleaves and stems of several plant species. Many Passiflora species have dark
dots and short stripes on their flowers that visually (to the human eye) mimic
ants or aphids. We present a new, third type of suggested arthropod mimicrythat adds to the previous suggestions of defensive Passiflora butterfly-egg
mimicry and caterpillar mimicry. It is contended that this type of Batesian ant
mimicry may protect Passiflora flowers from herbivory.
KEYWORDS: Ant mimicry, aphid mimicry, defense, flower, herbivory,
Passiflora

INTRODUCTION
Most studies of plants that mimic animals have focused on mimicry types that serve
pollination (Wickler, 1968). The best-known case is of bee mimicry by orchid flowersof the genus Ophrys, which resemble bees in size, shape, and odor, thus attracting malebees to pollinate them (Schiestl et al., 2000). While many accept the Ophrys mimicry hypothesis, the bee-mimicking signals can also be considered a different type of deception
based on the exploitation of perceptual biases in animals (Schaefer and Ruxton, 2009).
Whether a signal or an exploitation of perce ptual biases, the deception works and attracts sufficient pollination, indicating that animal mimicry can be beneficial to plants.
In one of the most important essays on plant mimicry, Wiens (1978) stated that defense
by means of predator mimicry as found in animals is not likely to be found in plants.
Although the evidence listed below contradicts that statement, the role of defensive,
anti-herbivory animal mimicry by plants has received very little, and partly anecdotal,attention. Only a few cases of defensive animal mimicry by plants have been suggested
to occur, and these were usually not studied experimentally. The suggested types of defensive animal mimicry by plants belong to two general types—direct animal mimicry
and mimicry of cues for animal action—and are manifested in several forms: (1) insect

160

s. lev-yadun

Isr. J. Entomol.

egg mimicry (Benson et al., 1975; Shapiro, 1981), (2) ant mimicry (Lev-Yadun andInbar, 2002), (3) aphid mimicry (Lev-Yadun and Inbar, 2002), (4) caterpillar mimicry(Rothschild, 1984; Lev-Yadun and Inbar, 2002), (5) animal chewing or tunneling damage
mimicry (Smith, 1986; Niemelä and Tuomi, 1987; Soltau et al., 2009), and (6) carrionand dung odors of various flowers, which simultaneously attract pollinators and mimic
predator and parasite danger (Lev-Yadun et al., 2009). For recent discussions on thespecific factors involved in the potential defensive role of animal mimicry by plants, see
Lev-Yadun and Inbar (2002), Lev-Yadun et al. (2009), and Schaefer and Ruxton (2009).
Here, I show that many Passiflora species have dark dots and short stripes on theirflowers, and suggest that these visually mimic ants, adding to the two previously described types of animal mimicry that may protect Passiflora plants from herbivory.
This paper is dedicated to the memory of Professor Joshua Kugler.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The predominantly American genus Passiflora comprises more than 500 species, someof which commonly attract ants by means of extrafloral nectaries on the bracts or on
the back of the sepals (Ulmer and MacDougal, 2004). After finding dark dots and short
stripes that appear to the human eye to resemble ants on the anthers and stigmas of many
species of Passiflora growing in Israel (Fig. 1), I studied the figure plates in Ulmer andMacDougal (2004), which cover several dozen Passiflora species, to examine whether
this putative ant mimicry is a common phenomenon in this genus.

Fig. 1. Visual ant mimicry in the anthers of a Passiflora sp. flower growing in Israel.

Vol. 39, 2009	ant mimicry by passiflora flowers?

161

RESULTSThe examination of pictures of the dozens of Passiflora species documented in Ulmerand MacDougal (2004) suggests that visual ant mimicry exists in at least 22 species.
In 17 species (P. amethystina, P. cincinnata, P. deltoifolia, P. eichleriana, P. exura,P. foetida, P. garckei, P. gibertii, P. incarnata, P. mayarum, P. menispermifolia,
P. mooreana, P. oerstedii, P. speciosa, P. subrotunda, P. tenuifila, and P. trisulca),
the anthers and stigmas were mottled (Fig. 1), and in five other species (P. candida,P. gracilis, P. lancearia, P. rhamnifolia, and P. sclerophylla), the petals were mottled.
It is likely that additional such species exist among the many Passiflora species thatwere not documented.
DISCUSSION
The American genus Passiflora is the best-known plant genus with regard to several
morphological adaptations suggested to have evolved to reduce herbivory via animalmimicry. The best-studied case is of butterfly egg mimicry by the leaves of several Passiflora species, which has been suggested to reduce egg-laying by Heliconius butterflies,
but seems to operate also for other plant and butterfly taxa (Benson et al., 1975; Shapiro,
1981; Schaefer and Ruxton, 2009). The second type of defensive animal mimicry in thisgenus was noted by Rothschild (1984) for the stipules along the branches of Passiflora
caerulae that resemble caterpillars, slugs, or snails crawling along the stems.
Defensive ant (Formicidae) mimicry in the shape of dark spots and flecks along thestems, branches, and petioles of Xanthium strumarium (Asteraceae) and on the petioles
and inflorescence stems of Arisarum vulgare (Araceae) was suggested by Lev-Yadunand Inbar (2002). However, no experimental work indicating actual herbivore deterrence has been conducted to date.
The potential benefit from ant-attendance mimicry for the plants is clear. Ants as agroup are ubiquitous, numerous, and aggressive, thus often deterring herbivores. Many
plant species are actually protected from herbivory by attracting “real” ants (e.g., Huxley and Cutler, 1991; Jolivet, 1998), while a variety of arthropods are known to mimic
ants as a defense mechanism against predators (e.g., Wickler, 1968; Edmunds, 1974).
Moreover, butterflies were found to distinguish predaceous ants on plants by sight and toselect enemy-free plants (Sendoya et al., 2009). Thus, plants may benefit from defensive
ant mimicry if herbivores consider them to be occupied by real ants and so refrain fromoccupying and consuming them, especially their reproductive organs (Lev-Yadun andInbar, 2002).
The hypothesis that visual ant mimicry, in the shape of dark dots and short stripes,
occurs in flowers is not exclusive. Such coloration also serves the function of attracting
pollinators and leading them to and within the flowers (Dafni and Giurfa, 1999; Biesmeijer et al., 2005). A dual purpose of flower characters for both pollination and defense
has been suggested many times for various visual and chemical flower characters (e.g.,Hinton, 1973; Strauss and Whittall, 2006; Hansen et al., 2007; Lev-Yadun, 2009).

162s. lev-yadun

Isr. J. Entomol.

Ant mimicry is not necessarily the sole option of defensive mimicry by means of thedark spots on flowers of Passiflora. Such spots may also mimic aphids. Aphid mimicryhas already been suggested to defend plants from herbivory because aphids refrain fromcolonizing plants already occupied by other aphids (Lev-Yadun and Inbar, 2002, andcitations therein).
I conclude that in the flowers of many Passiflora species the coloration pattern raises
the possibility of a visual defensive ant or aphid mimicry. While the evolution of suchcoloration patterns in flowers could be attributed primarily or solely to pollinator attraction, the occurrence of such color patterns on stems and leaves seems to be purely
defensive. The physiological functions of anthocyanins (the pigments responsible forthe suggested ant mimicry patterns), such as defending the plant from photoinhibitionand photooxidation (e.g., Lev-Yadun and Gould, 2008, and citations therein), do not
explain the dot and stripe patterns. Thus, it is possible that visual ant mimicry by plants
is a common phenomenon, the extent of which should be studied globally. When studying the complicated plant–ant relationships, defensive ant mimicry by plants should also
be taken into account. The suggested ant mimicry in Passiflora adds to the increasing
number of cases of apparent defensive plant coloration.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I thank Pekka Niemelä and an anonymous reviewer for their valuable comments.
REFERENCES
Archetti, M., Döring, T.F., Hagen, S.B., Hughes, N.M., Leather, S.R., Lee, D.W., Lev-Yadun, S.,
Manetas, Y., Ougham, H.J., Schaberg, P.G., and Thomas, H. 2009. Unravelling the evolution ofautumn colours: an interdisciplinary approach. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24: 166–173.
Benson, W.W., Brown, K.S., and Gilbert, L.E. 1975. Coevolution of plants and herbivores: passion flower butterflies. Evolution 29: 659–680.
Biesmeijer, J.C., Giurfa, M., Koedam, D., Potts, S.G., Joel, D.M., and Dafni, A. 2005. Convergent
evolution: floral guides, stingless bee nest entrances, and insectivorous pitchers. Naturwissenschaften 92: 444–450.
Dafni, A. and Giurfa, M. 1999. The functional ecology of floral guides in relation to insects behaviour and vision. Pp. 363–383. In: Wasser, S.P. (ed.). Evolutionary theory and processes:
modern perspectives, papers in honour of Eviatar Nevo. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. 466 pp.
Edmunds, M. 1974. Defence in animals. A survey of anti-predator defences. Longman Group Ltd.,
Harlow. 357 pp.
Hansen, D.M., Olesen, J.M., Mione, T., Johnson, S.D., and Müller, C.B. 2007. Coloured nectar: distribution, ecology, and evolution of an enigmatic floral trait. Biological Review 82:
83–111.
Hinton, H.E. 1973. Natural deception. Pp. 97–159. In: Gregory, R.L. and Gombrich, E.H. (eds.).
Illusion in nature and art. Duckworth, London. 288 pp.
Huxley, C.R. and Cutler, D.F. 1991. Ant–plant interactions. Oxford University Press, London.
601 pp.

Vol. 39, 2009	ant mimicry by passiflora flowers?

163

Jolivet, P. 1998. Interrelationship between insects and plants. CRC Press, Boca Raton. 309 pp.
Lee, D. 2007. Nature's palette. The science of plant color. The University of Chicago Press,Chicago. 409 pp.
Lev-Yadun, S. 2006. Defensive coloration in plants: a review of current ideas about anti-herbivore
coloration strategies. Pp. 292–299. In: Teixeira da Silva, J.A. (ed.). Floriculture, ornamentaland plant biotechnology: advances and topical issues. Vol. IV. Global Science Books, London.
696 pp.
Lev-Yadun, S. 2009. Aposematic (warning) coloration in plants. Pp. 167–202. In: Baluska, F.
(ed.). Plant–environment interactions. From sensory plant biology to active behavior. Vol. II.
Springer Verlag, Berlin. 308 pp.
Lev-Yadun, S. and Gould, K.S. 2008. Role of anthocyanins in plant defense. Pp. 21–48. In: Gould,K.S., Davies, K.M., and Winefield, C. (eds.). Life’s colorful solutions: the biosynthesis, functions, and applications of anthocyanins. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 329 pp.
Lev-Yadun, S. and Inbar, M. 2002. Defensive ant, aphid and caterpillar mimicry in plants. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 77: 393–398.
Lev-Yadun, S., Ne’eman, G., and Shanas, U. 2009. A sheep in wolf’s clothing: Do carrion anddung odours of flowers not only attract pollinators but also deter herbivores? BioEssays 31:84–88.
Lev-Yadun, S., Dafni, A., Flaishman, M.A., Inbar, M., Izhaki, I., Katzir, G., and Ne’eman, G.
2004. Plant coloration undermines herbivorous insect camouflage. BioEssays 26: 1126–1130.
Niemelä, P. and Tuomi, J. 1987. Does the leaf morphology of some plants mimic caterpillar damage? Oikos 50: 256–257.
Rothschild, M. 1984. Aide mémoire mimicry. Ecological Entomology 9: 311–319.
Schaefer, H.M. and Ruxton, G.D. 2009. Deception in plants: mimicry or perceptual exploitation?
Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24: 676–685.
Schiestl, F.P., Ayasse, M., Paulus, H.F., Löfstedt, C., Hansson, B.S., Ibarra, F., and Francke, W.
2000. Sex pheromone mimicry in the early spider orchid (Ophrys sphegodes): patterns of hydrocarbons as the key mechanism for pollination by sexual deception. Journal of Comparative
Physiology A 186: 567–574.
Sendoya, S.F., Freitas, A.V.L., and Oliveira, P.S. 2009. Egg-laying butterflies distinguish predaceous ants by sight. American Naturalist 174: 134–140.
Shapiro, A.M. 1981. Egg-mimics of Streptanthus (Cruciferae) deter oviposition by Pieris sisymbrii (Lepidoptera: Pieridae). Oecologia 48: 142–143.
Smith, A.P. 1986. Ecology of leaf color polymorphism in a tropical forest species: habitat segregation and herbivory. Oecologia 69: 283–287.
Soltau, U., Dötterl, S., and Liede-Schumann, S. 2009. Leaf variegation in Caladium steudneriifolium (Araceae): a case of mimicry? Evolutionary Ecology 23: 503–512.
Strauss, S.Y. and Whittall, J.B. 2006. Non-pollinator agents of selection on floral traits. Pp. 120–138. In: Harder, L.D. and Barrett, S.C.H. (eds.). The ecology and evolution of flowers. Oxford
University Press, Oxford. 370 pp.
Ulmer, T. and MacDougal, J.M. 2004. Passiflora. Passionflowers of the world. Timber Press,Portland. 430 pp.
Wickler, W. 1968. Mimicry in plants and animals. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London. 153 pp.
Wiens, D. 1978. Mimicry in plants. Evolutionary Biology 11: 365–403.

164s. lev-yadun

Isr. J. Entomol.