Literature DB >> 16033870

Human vision fails to distinguish widespread sexual dichromatism among sexually "monochromatic" birds.

Muir D Eaton1.   

Abstract

Historical scenarios of evolution of avian plumage coloration have been called into question with the discoveries that most birds can see UV light (which normal humans cannot), and that UV-reflecting plumages are widespread in birds. Several examples of sexual dichromatism not detectable with human visual capabilities suggest that our categorizations of plumages as sexually mono- or dichromatic might often be incorrect. Nonetheless, given the limited taxonomic scope of those examples, the vast majority of sexually monochromatic birds are still treated as such without question in avian research. Herein, I show that >90% of 139 species, in a broad sampling of presumed sexually monochromatic passerine birds, were actually sexually dichromatic from an avian visual perspective, based on comparisons of plumage reflectance data using a visual model of color discrimination thresholds. The taxonomic ubiquity of this result suggests that many existing interpretations of evolutionary patterns of sexual dichromatism in birds are erroneous. The visual model used herein provides a method for quantifying sexual dichromatism, revealing that most (58.7%) feather patches sampled lie along a continuum of dichromatism between avian and human discriminatory abilities and could represent unrecognized sexually selected signals. Sexual dichromatism in this study rarely resulted from intersexual differences in UV coloration alone, emphasizing the need for analysis of bird coloration in relation to the full extent of avian visual discriminatory abilities, including, but not limited to, UV-visual capabilities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16033870      PMCID: PMC1182419          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0501891102

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  18 in total

1.  Variations in cone photoreceptor abundance and the visual ecology of birds.

Authors:  N S Hart
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 1.836

Review 2.  The visual ecology of avian photoreceptors.

Authors:  N S Hart
Journal:  Prog Retin Eye Res       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 21.198

3.  Complex distribution of avian color vision systems revealed by sequencing the SWS1 opsin from total DNA.

Authors:  Anders Odeen; Olle Hastad
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2003-04-25       Impact factor: 16.240

4.  Differences in color vision make passerines less conspicuous in the eyes of their predators.

Authors:  Olle Håstad; Jonas Victorsson; Anders Odeen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-04-25       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Colour thresholds and receptor noise: behaviour and physiology compared.

Authors:  M Vorobyev; R Brandt; D Peitsch; S B Laughlin; R Menzel
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Ultraviolet signals in birds are special.

Authors:  Franziska Hausmann; Kathryn E Arnold; N Justin Marshall; Ian P F Owens
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2003-01-07       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  The roles of receptor noise and cone oil droplets in the photopic spectral sensitivity of the budgerigar, Melopsittacus undulatus.

Authors:  T H Goldsmith; B K Butler
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2003-02-07       Impact factor: 1.836

8.  Preferences for ultraviolet partners in the blue tit.

Authors: 
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 2.844

9.  Correlations between ultraviolet coloration, overwinter survival and offspring sex ratio in the blue tit.

Authors:  S C Griffith; J Ornborg; A F Russell; S Andersson; B C Sheldon
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 2.411

10.  Ultraviolet plumage reflectance distinguishes sibling bird species.

Authors:  Robert Bleiweiss
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-11-16       Impact factor: 11.205

View more
  28 in total

1.  Host-parasite coevolution beyond the nestling stage? Mimicry of host fledglings by the specialist screaming cowbird.

Authors:  María C De Mársico; Mariela G Gantchoff; Juan C Reboreda
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Visual modeling shows that avian host parents use multiple visual cues in rejecting parasitic eggs.

Authors:  Claire N Spottiswoode; Martin Stevens
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-04-26       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Antipredator defenses predict diversification rates.

Authors:  Kevin Arbuckle; Michael P Speed
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Optical properties of the uropygial gland secretion: no evidence for UV cosmetics in birds.

Authors:  Kaspar Delhey; Anne Peters; Peter H W Biedermann; Bart Kempenaers
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2008-06-17

5.  Migration and the evolution of duetting in songbirds.

Authors:  David M Logue; Michelle L Hall
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2014-03-11       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Avian egg and nestling detection in the wild: should we rely on visual models or behavioural experiments?

Authors:  Jesús M Avilés
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2020-05-18       Impact factor: 6.237

7.  Sibling competition and conspicuousness of nestling gapes in altricial birds: a comparative study.

Authors:  Juan J Soler; Jesús M Avilés
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-05-06       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Can eggs in a cavity be a female secondary sexual signal? Male nest visits and modelling of egg visual discrimination in blue tits.

Authors:  Marie-Jeanne Holveck; Claire Doutrelant; Romain Guerreiro; Philippe Perret; Doris Gomez; Arnaud Grégoire
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2010-02-17       Impact factor: 3.703

9.  The effects of dietary carotenoid supplementation and retinal carotenoid accumulation on vision-mediated foraging in the house finch.

Authors:  Matthew B Toomey; Kevin J McGraw
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  A trans-Amazonian screening of mtDNA reveals deep intraspecific divergence in forest birds and suggests a vast underestimation of species diversity.

Authors:  Borja Milá; Erika S Tavares; Alberto Muñoz Saldaña; Jordan Karubian; Thomas B Smith; Allan J Baker
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.