Literature DB >> 20421497

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

Claire N Spottiswoode1, Martin Stevens.   

Abstract

One of the most striking outcomes of coevolution between species is egg mimicry by brood parasitic birds, resulting from rejection behavior by discriminating host parents. Yet, how exactly does a host detect a parasitic egg? Brood parasitism and egg rejection behavior provide a model system for exploring the relative importance of different visual cues used in a behavioral task. Although hosts are discriminating, we do not know exactly what cues they use, and to answer this it is crucial to account for the receiver's visual perception. Color, luminance ("perceived lightness") and pattern information have never been simultaneously quantified and experimentally tested through a bird's eye. The cuckoo finch Anomalospiza imberbis and its hosts show spectacular polymorphisms in egg appearance, providing a good opportunity for investigating visual discrimination owing to the large range of patterns and colors involved. Here we combine field experiments in Africa with modeling of avian color vision and pattern discrimination to identify the specific visual cues used by hosts in making rejection decisions. We found that disparity between host and foreign eggs in both color and several aspects of pattern (dispersion, principal marking size, and variability in marking size) were important predictors of rejection, especially color. These cues correspond exactly to the principal differences between host and parasitic eggs, showing that hosts use the most reliable available cues in making rejection decisions, and select for parasitic eggs that are increasingly mimetic in a range of visual attributes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20421497      PMCID: PMC2889299          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0910486107

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


  24 in total

1.  Accurate memory for colour but not pattern contrast in chicks.

Authors:  D Osorio; C D Jones; M Vorobyev
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  1999-02-25       Impact factor: 10.834

2.  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

Review 3.  Photoreceptor spectral sensitivities in terrestrial animals: adaptations for luminance and colour vision.

Authors:  D Osorio; M Vorobyev
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2005-09-07       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  The scaling effects of substrate texture on camouflage patterning in cuttlefish.

Authors:  Chuan-Chin Chiao; Charles Chubb; Kendra Buresch; Liese Siemann; Roger T Hanlon
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2009-04-10       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Evolutionary biology: arms races in the eye of the beholder.

Authors:  Rebecca J Safran; Maren N Vitousek
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2008-09-09       Impact factor: 10.834

6.  Arms races between and within species.

Authors:  R Dawkins; J R Krebs
Journal:  Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  1979-09-21

7.  The modelling of avian visual perception predicts behavioural rejection responses to foreign egg colours.

Authors:  Phillip Cassey; Marcel Honza; Tomas Grim; Mark E Hauber
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2008-10-23       Impact factor: 3.703

8.  Avian colour vision: effects of variation in receptor sensitivity and noise data on model predictions as compared to behavioural results.

Authors:  Olle Lind; Almut Kelber
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Disruptive coloration and background pattern matching.

Authors:  Innes C Cuthill; Martin Stevens; Jenna Sheppard; Tracey Maddocks; C Alejandro Párraga; Tom S Troscianko
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-03-03       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  The unsuitability of HTML-based colour charts for estimating animal colours--a comment on Berggren and Merilä (2004).

Authors:  Martin Stevens; Innes C Cuthill
Journal:  Front Zool       Date:  2005-08-30       Impact factor: 3.172

View more
  61 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.  Egg retrieval versus egg rejection in cuckoo hosts.

Authors:  Canchao Yang; Wei Liang; Anders P Møller
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Higher-level pattern features provide additional information to birds when recognizing and rejecting parasitic eggs.

Authors:  Mary Caswell Stoddard; Benedict G Hogan; Martin Stevens; Claire N Spottiswoode
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  Brood parasitism selects for no defence in a cuckoo host.

Authors:  Oliver Krüger
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Visual mimicry of host nestlings by cuckoos.

Authors:  Naomi E Langmore; Martin Stevens; Golo Maurer; Robert Heinsohn; Michelle L Hall; Anne Peters; Rebecca M Kilner
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2011-01-12       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Hyperspectral imaging of cuttlefish camouflage indicates good color match in the eyes of fish predators.

Authors:  Chuan-Chin Chiao; J Kenneth Wickiser; Justine J Allen; Brock Genter; Roger T Hanlon
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-05-16       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 7.  Vive la difference! Self/non-self recognition and the evolution of signatures of identity in arms races with parasites.

Authors:  Claire N Spottiswoode; Robert Busch
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 6.237

8.  Variation in multicomponent recognition cues alters egg rejection decisions: a test of the optimal acceptance threshold hypothesis.

Authors:  Daniel Hanley; Analía V López; Vanina D Fiorini; Juan C Reboreda; Tomáš Grim; Mark E Hauber
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 9.  Defences against brood parasites from a social immunity perspective.

Authors:  S C Cotter; D Pincheira-Donoso; R Thorogood
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 6.237

10.  Coevolution in action: disruptive selection on egg colour in an avian brood parasite and its host.

Authors:  Canchao Yang; Wei Liang; Yan Cai; Suhua Shi; Fugo Takasu; Anders P Møller; Anton Antonov; Frode Fossøy; Arne Moksnes; Eivin Røskaft; Bård G Stokke
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.