Literature DB >> 18381256

Enhancement of chromatic contrast increases predation risk for striped butterflies.

Nina Stobbe1, H Martin Schaefer.   

Abstract

Many prey species have evolved defensive colour patterns to avoid attacks. One type of camouflage, disruptive coloration, relies on contrasting patterns that hinder predators' ability to recognize an object. While high contrasts are used to facilitate detection in many visual communication systems, they are thought to provide misleading information about prey appearance in disruptive patterns. A fundamental tenet in disruptive coloration theory is the principle of 'maximum disruptive contrast', i.e. disruptive patterns are more effective when higher contrasts are involved. We tested this principle in highly contrasting stripes that have often been described as disruptive patterns. Varying the strength of chromatic contrast between stripes and adjacent pattern elements in artificial butterflies, we found a strong negative correlation between survival probability and chromatic contrast strength. We conclude that too high a contrast leads to increased conspicuousness rather than to effective camouflage. However, artificial butterflies that sported contrasts similar to those of the model species Limenitis camilla survived equally well as background-matching butterflies without these stripes. Contrasting stripes do thus not necessarily increase predation rates. This result may provide new insights into the design and characteristics of a range of colour patterns such as sexual, mimetic and aposematic signals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18381256      PMCID: PMC2602664          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2008.0209

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  27 in total

1.  Visual constraints in foraging bumblebees: flower size and color affect search time and flight behavior.

Authors:  J Spaethe; J Tautz; L Chittka
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2001-03-20       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  The visual ecology of avian photoreceptors.

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

Review 3.  Cephalopod chromatophores: neurobiology and natural history.

Authors:  J B Messenger
Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc       Date:  2001-11

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.  Hiding in plain sight.

Authors:  Thomas N Sherratt; Arash Rashed; Christopher D Beatty
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2005-06-09       Impact factor: 17.712

6.  Camouflage by edge enhancement in animal coloration patterns and its implications for visual mechanisms.

Authors:  D Osorio; M V Srinivasan
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  1991-05-22       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  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

8.  The effect of shape parameters on maximal detection distance of model targets by honeybee workers.

Authors:  G Ne'eman; P G Kevan
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 1.836

9.  Red & black or black & white? Phylogeny of the Araschnia butterflies (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) and evolution of seasonal polyphenism.

Authors:  Z Fric; M Konvicka; J Zrzavy
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 2.411

10.  Disruptive contrast in animal camouflage.

Authors:  Martin Stevens; Innes C Cuthill; Amy M M Windsor; Hannah J Walker
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2006-10-07       Impact factor: 5.349

View more
  18 in total

1.  Outline and surface disruption in animal camouflage.

Authors:  Martin Stevens; Isabel S Winney; Abi Cantor; Julia Graham
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-02-22       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 2.  Cephalopod dynamic camouflage: bridging the continuum between background matching and disruptive coloration.

Authors:  R T Hanlon; C-C Chiao; L M Mäthger; A Barbosa; K C Buresch; C Chubb
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-02-27       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 3.  Defining disruptive coloration and distinguishing its functions.

Authors:  Martin Stevens; Sami Merilaita
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-02-27       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  Animal camouflage: current issues and new perspectives.

Authors:  Martin Stevens; Sami Merilaita
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-02-27       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Testing Thayer's hypothesis: can camouflage work by distraction?

Authors:  Martin Stevens; Julia Graham; Isabel S Winney; Abi Cantor
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2008-12-23       Impact factor: 3.703

6.  The benefit of being a social butterfly: communal roosting deters predation.

Authors:  Susan D Finkbeiner; Adriana D Briscoe; Robert D Reed
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  The function of body coloration of the hai coral snake Sinomicrurus japonicus boettgeri.

Authors:  Koji Mochida; Wan-Yu Zhang; Mamoru Toda
Journal:  Zool Stud       Date:  2015-02-24       Impact factor: 2.058

8.  Frequency dependence shapes the adaptive landscape of imperfect Batesian mimicry.

Authors:  Susan D Finkbeiner; Patricio A Salazar; Sofía Nogales; Cassidi E Rush; Adriana D Briscoe; Ryan I Hill; Marcus R Kronforst; Keith R Willmott; Sean P Mullen
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2018-04-11       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Chromaticity in the UV/blue range facilitates the search for achromatically background-matching prey in birds.

Authors:  Nina Stobbe; Marina Dimitrova; Sami Merilaita; H Martin Schaefer
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-02-27       Impact factor: 6.237

10.  Inferring predator behavior from attack rates on prey-replicas that differ in conspicuousness.

Authors:  Yoel E Stuart; Nathan Dappen; Neil Losin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-10-31       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.