My labmates recently published a paper on the evolution of imperfect mimicry in hoverflies (Syrphidae) in a top science journal: Nature. The paper is titled "A comparative analysis of the evolution of imperfect mimicry" and has been receiving a fair amount of press. Rightfully so, it assesses the validity of 5 distinct theories proposed to explain why mimicry is frequently imperfect, and sometimes poor. I know of no other research that has examined of these theories so synthetically and with such high quality empirical support. There is a perhaps more readable News & Views article about this paper available here: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7390/full/483410a.html Note that Nature stringently limits access to their material, which may prevent some of you from accessing the articles directly (at least for now).
The New York Times had a short piece on this interesting research, and I was
excited to see that my research on caterpillar eyespots is mentioned at the end
of the article:
"The scientists think they may be able to apply similar methods to
study mimicry in other animals. Next up: large caterpillars with eyespots that
help them mimic snakes."
The article can be found here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/27/science/as-hoverflies-grow-so-do-their-acting-skills.html