Literature DB >> 32457164

Imperfect transparency and camouflage in glass frogs.

James B Barnett1,2, Constantine Michalis2, Hannah M Anderson3, Brendan L McEwen3, Justin Yeager4, Jonathan N Pruitt3, Nicholas E Scott-Samuel5, Innes C Cuthill2.   

Abstract

Camouflage patterns prevent detection and/or recognition by matching the background, disrupting edges, or mimicking particular background features. In variable habitats, however, a single pattern cannot match all available sites all of the time, and efficacy may therefore be reduced. Active color change provides an alternative where coloration can be altered to match local conditions, but again efficacy may be limited by the speed of change and range of patterns available. Transparency, on the other hand, creates high-fidelity camouflage that changes instantaneously to match any substrate but is potentially compromised in terrestrial environments where image distortion may be more obvious than in water. Glass frogs are one example of terrestrial transparency and are well known for their transparent ventral skin through which their bones, intestines, and beating hearts can be seen. However, sparse dorsal pigmentation means that these frogs are better described as translucent. To investigate whether this imperfect transparency acts as camouflage, we used in situ behavioral trials, visual modeling, and laboratory psychophysics. We found that the perceived luminance of the frogs changed depending on the immediate background, lowering detectability and increasing survival when compared to opaque frogs. Moreover, this change was greatest for the legs, which surround the body at rest and create a diffuse transition from background to frog luminance rather than a sharp, highly salient edge. This passive change in luminance, without significant modification of hue, suggests a camouflage strategy, "edge diffusion," distinct from both transparency and active color change.

Entities:  

Keywords:  camouflage; color change; edge diffusion; glass frog; transparency

Year:  2020        PMID: 32457164      PMCID: PMC7293656          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1919417117

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


  28 in total

1.  The physical basis of transparency in biological tissue: ultrastructure and the minimization of light scattering

Authors: 
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  1999-07-21       Impact factor: 2.691

Review 2.  From spectral information to animal colour vision: experiments and concepts.

Authors:  Almut Kelber; Daniel Osorio
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-02-17       Impact factor: 5.349

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

Review 4.  How camouflage works.

Authors:  Sami Merilaita; Nicholas E Scott-Samuel; Innes C Cuthill
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Induced pigmentation in zooplankton: a trade-off between threats from predation and ultraviolet radiation.

Authors:  L A Hansson
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2000-11-22       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  False holes as camouflage.

Authors:  Leah M Costello; Nicholas E Scott-Samuel; Karin Kjernsmo; Innes C Cuthill
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2020-03-11       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  Background complexity and the detectability of camouflaged targets by birds and humans.

Authors:  Feng Xiao; Innes C Cuthill
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  Vision in the peafowl (Aves: Pavo cristatus).

Authors:  Nathan S Hart
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.312

Review 9.  Camouflage through colour change: mechanisms, adaptive value and ecological significance.

Authors:  Rafael C Duarte; Augusto A V Flores; Martin Stevens
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 6.237

10.  Distance-dependent aposematism and camouflage in the cinnabar moth caterpillar (Tyria jacobaeae, Erebidae).

Authors:  James B Barnett; Innes C Cuthill; Nicholas E Scott-Samuel
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2018-02-21       Impact factor: 2.963

View more
  3 in total

1.  Imperfect transparency and camouflage in glass frogs.

Authors:  James B Barnett; Constantine Michalis; Hannah M Anderson; Brendan L McEwen; Justin Yeager; Jonathan N Pruitt; Nicholas E Scott-Samuel; Innes C Cuthill
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Variable crab camouflage patterns defeat search image formation.

Authors:  Jolyon Troscianko; Ossi Nokelainen; John Skelhorn; Martin Stevens
Journal:  Commun Biol       Date:  2021-03-05

3.  Generalist camouflage can be more successful than microhabitat specialisation in natural environments.

Authors:  Emmanuelle Sophie Briolat; Lina María Arenas; Anna E Hughes; Eric Liggins; Martin Stevens
Journal:  BMC Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-08-03
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.