Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T12:01:42.600Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Camouflage behaviour and body orientation on backgrounds containing directional patterns

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Richard J. Webster ,
Alison Callahan ,
Jean-Guy J. Godin  and
Thomas N. Sherratt
Edited by
Martin Stevens  and
Sami Merilaita
Richard J. Webster
Affiliation:
Carleton University, Ontario, Canada
Alison Callahan
Affiliation:
Carleton University, Ontario, Canada
Jean-Guy J. Godin
Affiliation:
Carleton University, Ontario, Canada
Thomas N. Sherratt
Affiliation:
Carleton University, Ontario, Canada
Martin Stevens
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Sami Merilaita
Affiliation:
Åbo Akademi University, Finland
Get access

Summary

The best-known interrelated mechanisms through which coloration can act to reduce predator detection rates of potential prey are background matching and disruptive coloration (Thayer 1909; Cott 1940; Kingsland 1978; Ruxton et al. 2004; Wilkinson & Sherratt 2008; Stevens & Merilaita 2009). With background matching, objects are difficult to detect simply due to their similarity to their background. Conversely, the striking/high-contrast markings involved in disruptive coloration create ‘the appearance of false edges and boundaries and hinders the detection or recognition of an object's outline and shape’ (Stevens & Merilaita 2009). Coloration is but one means through which animals achieve crypsis; others include behaviour and morphology, including body size and shape. Here we focus on behaviour and its interaction with coloration in relation to crypsis.

Type
Chapter
Information
Animal Camouflage
Mechanisms and Function
 , pp. 101 - 117
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, J. J., Mäthger, L. M., Barbosa, A. et al. 2009. Cuttlefish dynamic camouflage: responses to substrate choice and integration of multiple visual cues. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 277, 1031–1039.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Atkinson, C. J. L., Bergmann, M. & Kaiser, M. J. 2004. Habitat selection in whiting. Journal of Fish Biology, 64, 788–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, A. B. & Kamil, A. C. 2002. Visual predators select for crypticity and polymorphism in virtual prey. Nature, 415, 609–613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bond, A. B. & Kamil, A. C. 2006. Spatial heterogeneity, predator cognition, and the evolution of color polymorphism in virtual prey. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 103, 3214–3219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Callahan, A. 2007. Quantifying crypsis: analyzing the resting site selection of moths in their natural habitats. Unpublished BSc thesis, Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa.
Chiao, C. C., Kelman, E. J. & Hanlon, R. T. 2005. Disruptive body patterning of cuttlefish (Sepia officinalis) requires visual information regarding edges and contrast of objects in natural substrate backgrounds. Biological Bulletin, 208, 7–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christensen, B. & Persson, L. 1993. Species-specific antipredatory behaviors: effects on prey choice in different habitats. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 32, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cott, H. 1940. Adaptive Coloration in Animals. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Cuthill, I. C., Bennett, A. T. D., Partridge, J. C. & Maier, E. J. 1999. Plumage reflectance and the objective assessment of avian sexual dichromatism. American Naturalist, 153, 183–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuthill, I. C., Partridge, J. C., Bennett, A. T. D. et al. 2000. Ultraviolet vision in birds. Advances in the Study of Behavour, 29, 159–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimitrova, M. & Merilaita, S. 2010. Prey concealment: visual background complexity and prey contrast distribution. Behavioral Ecology, 21, 176–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dusenbury, D. B. 1992. Sensory Ecology: How Organisms Acquire and Respond to Information. New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Endler, J. A. 1984. Progressive background in moths, and a quantitative measure of crypsis. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 22, 187–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Endler, J. A. & Mielke, P. W. 2005. Comparing entire colour patterns as birds see them. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 86, 405–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, S., Callahan, A., Klassen, D. & Sherratt, T. N. 2007. Empirical tests of the role of disruptive coloration in reducing detectability. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 274, 1325–1331.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ghim, M. M. & Hodos, W. 2006. Spatial contrast sensitivity of birds. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 192, 523–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, I. E. 1968. Interactions between items in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 76, 248–355.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hart, N. S. & Hunt, D. M. 2007. Avian visual pigments: characteristics, spectral tuning, and evolution. American Naturalist, 169, S7–S26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hebets, E. A., Elias, D. O., Mason, A. C., Miller, G. L. & Stratton, G. E. 2008. Substrate-dependent signalling success in the wolf spider, Schizocosa retrorsa. Animal Behaviour, 75, 605–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kettlewell, H. B. D. 1958. A survey of the frequencies of Biston betularia and its melanic forms in Britain. Heredity, 12, 51–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kettlewell, H. B. D. 1973. The Evolution of Melanism: The Study of a Recurring Necessity, with Special Reference to Industrial Melanism in the Lepidoptera. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kingsland, S. 1978. Abbott Thayer and the protective coloration debate. Journal of the History of Biology, 11, 223–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merilaita, S. 1998. Crypsis through disruptive coloration in an isopod. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 265, 1059–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merilaita, S. 2003. Visual background complexity facilitates the evolution of camouflage. Evolution, 57, 1248–1254.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Merilaita, S. & Lind, J. 2005. Background-matching and disruptive coloration, and the evolution of cryptic coloration. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 272, 665–670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moles, A. & Norcross, B. L. 1995. Sediment preference in juvenile Pacific flatfishes. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research, 34, 177–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morse, D. H. 2006. Fine-scale substrate use by a small sit-and-wait predator. Behavioral Ecology, 17, 405–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moss, R., Jackson, R. R. & Pollard, S. D. 2006. Hiding in the grass: background matching conceals moths (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) from detection by spider eyes (Araneae: Salticidae). New Zealand Journal of Zoology, 33, 207–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osorio, D. & Srinivasan, M. V. 1991. Camouflage by edge enhancement in animal coloration patterns and its implications for visual mechanisms. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 244, 81–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Osorio, D. & Vorobyev, M. 2005. Photoreceptor spectral sensitivities in terrestrial animals: adaptations for luminance and colour vision. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 272, 1745–1752.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pietrewicz, A. T. & Kamil, A. C. 1977. Visual detection of cryptic prey by Blue Jays (Cyanocitta cristata). Science, 195, 580–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ray, S. 2002. Applied Photographic Optics: Lenses and Optical Systems for Photography. Burlington, MA: Focal Press.Google Scholar
Rensink, R. A., Oregan, J. K. & Clark, J. J. 1997. To see or not to see: the need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychological Science, 8, 368–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruxton, G. D., Sherratt, T. N. & Speed, M. 2004. Avoiding Attack: The Evolutionary Ecology of Crypsis, Warning Signals and Mimicry. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryer, C. H., Lemke, J. L., Boersma, K. & Levas, S. 2008. Adaptive coloration, behavior and predation vulnerability in three juvenile north Pacific flatfishes. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 359, 62–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sargent, T. D. 1966. Background selection of geometrid and noctuid moths. Science, 154, 1674–1675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sargent, T. D. 1968. Cryptic moths: effects on background selections of painting circumocular scales. Science, 159, 100–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sargent, T. D. 1969a. Background selections of pale and melanic forms of cryptic moth Phigalia titea (Cramer). Nature, 222, 585–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sargent, T. D. 1969b. Behavioral adaptations of cryptic Moths. II. Experimental studies on bark-like species. Journal of the New York Entomological Society, 77, 75–79.Google Scholar
Sargent, T. D. 1969c. Behavioral adaptations of cryptic moths.V. Preliminary studies on an anthophilous species, Schinia florida (Noctuidae). Journal of the New York Entomological Society, 77, 123–128.Google Scholar
Sargent, T. D. 1969d. Behavioural adaptations of cryptic moths. III. Resting attitudes of two bark-like species, Melanolophia canadaria and Catocala ultronia. Animal Behaviour, 17, 670–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siebeck, U. E., Parker, A., Sprenger, D., Mäthger, L. M. & Wallis, G. 2010. A species of reef fish that uses ultraviolet patterns for covert face recognition. Current Biology, 20, 407–410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smilek, D., Eastwood, J. D., Reynolds, M. G. & Kingstone, A. 2008. Metacognition and change detection: do lab and life really converge? Consciousness and Cognition, 17, 1056–1061.CrossRef
Stevens, M. 2010. Sensory ecology, evolution, and behavior. Current Zoology56, 1–3.Google Scholar
Stevens, M. & Cuthill, I. C. 2006. Disruptive coloration, crypsis and edge detection in early visual processing. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 273, 2141–2147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, M. & Merilaita, S. 2009. Defining disruptive coloration and distinguishing its functions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B., 364, 481–488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, M., Párraga, C. A., Cuthill, I. C., Partridge, J. C. & Troscianko, T. S. 2007. Using digital photography to study animal coloration. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 90, 211–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoddard, M. C. & Stevens, M. 2010. Pattern mimicry of host eggs by the common cuckoo, as seen through a bird's eye. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 277, 1387–1393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thayer, G. H. 1909. Concealing Coloration in the Animal Kingdom. New York: Macmillan.
Tikkanen, P., Huhta, A. & Muotka, T. 2000. Determinants of substrate selection in lotic mayfly larvae: is cryptic coloration important? Archiv für Hydrobiologie, 148, 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, R. J., Callahan, A., Godin, J. G. J. & Sherratt, T. N. 2009. Behaviourally mediated crypsis in two nocturnal moths with contrasting appearance. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 364, 503–510.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkinson, D. M. & Sherratt, T. N. 2008. The art of concealment. The Biologist, 55, 10–15.Google Scholar
Zar, J. H. 1999. Biostatistical Analysis, 4th edn. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×