Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 221

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Evolutionary Stability of Aposematic Coloration and Prey Unprofitability: A Theoretical Analysis

Leimar, Olof, Enquist, Magnus, Sillen-Tullberg, Birgitta·1986·The American Naturalist

Abstract

Species that have evolved some defense against predators, here called unprofitable prey, often show aposematic (warning) coloration. The process whereby a predator learns not to attack unprofitable prey is an essential ingredient in the interaction between predators and such prey. Using learning theory and evolutionary game theory, we develop a model of predator-prey interactions, focusing on two characters: prey unprofitability and prey coloration. Both these characters are treated as one-dimensional variables, and it is assumed that variation in coloration causes variation in the rate at which prey are detected by predators. Regarding the two characters as strategies used by prey individuals, we determine evolutionarily stable strategies (ESS's). The coloration yielding the smallest possible rate of detection is called cryptic, and colorations yielding higher rates of detection are called aposematic. Two aspects of predator behavior are shown to be important for the stability of an aposematic strategy: a reluctance to attack prey more conspicuously colored than those so far encountered, and faster avoidance learning vis-a-vis prey with more conspicuous coloration. At least one of these factors must be present for an aposematic strategy to be an ESS. Similarly, two factors are important for the evolution of prey unprofitability: increased survival of attacks by a predator, and faster avoidance learning vis-a-vis more-unprofitable prey. If there is a nonpredatory cost associated with unprofitability, at least one of these factors must be present for an unprofitable strategy to be an ESS. The first factor mentioned, both for coloration and unprofitability, results in individual selection. The second factor, variation in the rate of avoidance learning caused by variation in the character, produces a selection pressure only if there is a correlation between prey phenotypes encountered by the predator. Such correlation may be the result of relatedness among prey individuals (resulting in kin selection) or repeated encounters with the same prey individual.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/284581

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 221

Metadata

Authors
Leimar, O., Enquist, M., & Sillen-Tullberg, B.
Venue
The American Naturalist
Published
1986-10
Volume
128
Issue
4
Pages
469-490
ISSN
  • 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5323
OpenAlex
W2037311047
Cited by
221
References
0
FWCI
7.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evolutionary Stability of Aposematic Coloration and Prey Unprofitability: A Theoretical Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/284581
The paper
Leimar, O., Enquist, M., & Sillen-Tullberg, B. (1986). Evolutionary Stability of Aposematic Coloration and Prey Unprofitability: A Theoretical Analysis. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/284581

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.