Re: Animals that are poisonous to ingestion Social Behavior

<drosen0000@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:eduu9o$1jaf$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
What finess value does being poisonous upon ingestion have to
animal prey? I am not talking about poison that is actually applied to
the predator by the prey biting, but to the passive ingestion of
posion.

There does not seem to be any advantage unless there is a
correlated social behaviour involoved. Once eaten, the prey is dead and
can't produce descendents anyway. If the predator dies, it does not
bring the eaten prey individual back to life. If the predator's species
dies, it still doesn't help the descendents of that prey animal since
there are none. If the prey animal species is not social, the
nonvenomous individuals are protected just as much by the death of the
predator as the venomous individuals. The venomous individuals have to
pay a metabolic penalty for producing the venom.

Some social behaviors that would make being poisonous to ingestion
a benefit to other members of the prey's family (e.g., selfish gene
scenarios). However, I never heard of a correlation between social
behavior and being poisonous. Do venomous animals tend to be social?
Does anyone know if poisonous frogs stick together in family groups?

These topics have been discussed here over the pats few years. Use
Google to search for the word 'aposematism' in this group. Also for
"butterflies and mimicry".

There isn't always a 'metabolic cost' involved in becoming noxious.
Google the web for 'monarch sequestration'.

There is a complex game theoretic dynamic between a population of
prey, which presumably can display warning coloration or not, and
independently be noxious or not, and a population of predators,
which presumably can be cautious or can be bluff-callers.

If there are enough cautious predators, then displaying warning
colors is a good idea for the prey. But it is harder to see the
advantage of being noxious. You need some kind of kin selection
or deme-level selection justification. You also need for there
to be some bluff-callers among the predators. It is a very complex
example of frequency-dependent selection in two species.


.