Practice question

A harmless fish that resembles a venomous fish gains protection without producing the costly defense itself, which is the defining asymmetry of Batesian mimicry. Predators that have been injured by, or have learned to avoid, the venomous model generalize its recognizable shape, coloration, or behavior to the edible mimic. The mimic benefits because mistaken identity lowers attack probability, while excessive mimic abundance can disadvantage the model by making its warning signal less reliable. This contrasts with Müllerian mimicry, where both resembling species are defended and share the cost of educating predators. Wasmannian mimicry specifically concerns organisms resembling social insects with which they associate, and aggressive mimicry helps a predator or parasite approach prey or hosts. “Defensive coloration” is too broad: it includes crypsis and warning coloration but does not identify the model–mimic relationship. The key biological evidence would be that the model is genuinely venomous, the mimic lacks comparable venom, their ranges overlap with the relevant predator community, and resemblance measurably reduces attacks.