Study
Experimental studies of mimicry in some North American butterflies
Brower, Jane Van Zandt
Evolution, 1958
Offered caged birds unpalatable model butterflies followed by palatable mimics, and separately offered mimics to birds with no prior experience of the model, recording whether birds rejected mimics they had never tasted.
- Studied in
- Danaus plexippus, Limenitis archippus, Aves
- Sample size
- caged birds offered models and mimics in sequence
Birds that had experienced the unpalatable model subsequently rejected the palatable mimic on sight, while birds without that experience ate it readily.
What it means
The authors' reading, and ours. Where they differ, that difference is the point.
How the authors put it
Batesian mimicry works through predator learning, and protection depends on the predator having previously encountered the model.
How NatureHQ reads it
The experiment that demonstrated the mechanism directly rather than inferring it from resemblance. It also establishes the dependency that governs everything else about Batesian mimicry: no experience of the model, no protection for the mimic.
- Caged birds under laboratory conditions, with prey presented rather than found.
- The monarch–viceroy pairing itself was later reinterpreted, since viceroys proved to be unpalatable in their own right in at least some populations, which makes that particular pair Müllerian rather than Batesian.
What this study is used for on NatureHQ
One study can inform several subjects. Here is everywhere this one is cited.
Published by: Wiley journalsPublished in a Wiley journal.
Search for this paper by title and author
The reference details here were taken down by an editor and have not been confirmed against an independent catalogue of published work. The title, authors, journal and year are enough to find the paper; we would rather tell you that than print a reference number nobody has checked.
NatureHQ summarises research in its own words and does not reproduce published text. Reviewed 2026-09-03.