Animal camouflage: Biology meets psychology, computer science and art

International Journal of Design and Nature and Ecodynamics

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 183-202

  Cuthill, I C ^a   Troscianko, T S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Animal colouration; Antipredator behaviour; Camoufl age; Colour vision; Crypsis; Defensive colouration

Indexed keywords

ANTIPREDATOR BEHAVIOUR; COMPUTATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE; COMPUTER SCIENTISTS; EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES; NATURAL SELECTION; NON-HUMAN SPECIES; PERCEPTION AND COGNITION; PREDATION RISK;

COLOR VISION; COMPUTER CRIME;

ANIMALS;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 77952521299     PISSN: 17557437     EISSN: 17557445     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2495/DNE-V4-N3-183-202     Document Type: Article

References (98)

1. Darwin, E., Zoonomia, J. Johnson: London, 1794 (reprinted by Project Gutenberg www. gutenberg.org).
2. Wallace, A.R., Darwinism. An Exposition of the Theory of Natural Selection with Some of its Applications, Macmillan& Co: London, 1889.
3. Poulton, E.B., The Colours of Animals: Their Meaning and Use. Especially Considered in the Case of Insects, 2nd edn, The International Scientifi c Series, vol.LXVIII, Kegan Paul, Trench Trübner& Co. Ltd.: London, 1890.
4. Beddard, F.E., Animal Coloration; An Account of the Principle Facts and Theories Relating to the Colours and Markings of Animals, 2nd edn, Swan Sonnenschein: London, 1895.
5. Endler, J.A., Progressive background matching in moths, and a quantitative measure of crypsis. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 22(3), pp. 187-231, 1984. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.1984. tb01677.x
6. Merilaita, S., Tuomi, J.& Jormalainen, V., Optimization of cryptic coloration in heterogeneous habitats. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 67(2), pp. 151-161, 1999. doi: 10.1111/ j.1095-8312.1999.tb01858.x
7. Bond, A.B.& Kamil, A.C., Visual predators select for crypticity and polymorphism in virtual prey. Nature, 415, pp. 609-613, 2002. doi:10.1038/415609a (Pubitemid 34136381)
8. Thayer, A.H., The law which underlies protective coloration. The Auk, 13, pp. 477-482, 1896.
9. Thayer, G.H., Concealing-Coloration in the Animal Kingdom: An Exposition of the Laws of Disguise Through Color and Pattern: Being a Summary of Abbott H. Thayer's Discoveries, Macmillan: New York, 1909.
10. Cott, H.B., Adaptive Coloration in Animals, Methuen& Co. Ltd.: London, 1940.
11. Rolls, E.T.& Deco, G., Computational Neuroscience of Vision, Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2002.
12. Bennett, A.T.D., Cuthill, I.C.& Norris, K.J., Sexual selection and the mismeasure of color. American Naturalist, 144(5), pp. 848-860, 1994. doi:10.1086/285711
13. Endler, J.A., On the measurement and classifi cation of colour in studies of animal colour patterns. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 41(4), pp. 315-352, 1990. doi: 10.1111/j.1095- 8312.1990.tb00839.x
14. Endler, J.A., Signals, signal conditions, and the direction of evolution. American Naturalist, 139(Suppl.), pp. S125-S153, 1992. doi:10.1086/285308
15. Guilford, T.& Dawkins, M.S., Receiver psychology and the evolution of animal signals. Animal Behaviour, 42, pp. 1-14, 1991. doi:10.1016/S0003- 3472(05)80600-1
16. Ryan, M.J.& Keddy-Hector, A., Directional patterns of female mate choice and the role of sensory biases. American Naturalist, 139, pp. S4-S35, 1992. doi:10.1086/285303
17. Endler, J.A.& Basolo, A.L., Sensory ecology, receiver biases and sexual selection. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 13(10), pp. 415-420, 1998. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01471-2 (Pubitemid 28430687)
18. ten Cate, C.& Rowe, C., Biases in signal evolution: learning makes a difference. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 22(7), pp. 380-387, 2007. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2007.03.006 (Pubitemid 46924808)
19. Behrens, R.R., False Colors: Art, Design and Modern Camoufl age, Bobolink Books: Dysart, Iowa, 2002.
20. Behrens, R.R., Camoufl age, art and Gestalt. North American Review, 265(4), pp. 8-18, 1980.
21. Behrens, R.R., Visual art and camoufl age. Leonardo, 11(3), pp. 203-204, 1978. doi:10.2307/1574143
22. Cuthill, I.C., Color Perception, in: Bird Coloration. Mechanisms and Measurement, eds G.E. Hill& K.J. McGraw, vol.1, Harvard University Press: Cambridge MA, pp. 3-40, 2006.
23. Cuthill, I.C., Partridge, J.C., Bennett, A.T.D., Church, S.C., Hart, N.S.& Hunt, S., Ultraviolet vision in birds. Advances in the Study of Behaviour, 29, pp. 159-214, 2000. doi:10.1016/S0065- 3454(08)60105-9
24. Surridge, A.K., Osorio, D.& Mundy, N.I., Evolution and selection of trichromatic vision in primates. Trends in Ecology& Evolution, 18(4), pp. 198-205, 2003. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347- (03)00012-0 (Pubitemid 36345739)
25. Vorobyev, M., Coloured oil droplets enhance colour discrimination. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 270(1521), pp. 1255-1261, 2003. doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2381 (Pubitemid 36750958)
26. Vorobyev, M., Osorio, D., Bennett, A.T.D., Marshall, N.J.& Cuthill, I.C., Tetrachromacy, oil droplets and bird plumage colours. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 183, pp. 621-633, 1998. doi:10.1007/s003590050286 (Pubitemid 28554072)
27. Lovell, P.G., Tolhurst, D.J., Parraga, C.A., Baddeley, R., Leonards, U.& Troscianko, J., Stability of the color-opponent signals under changes of illuminant in natural scenes. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 22(10), pp. 2060-2071, 2005. doi:10.1364/JOSAA.22.002060 (Pubitemid 41715818)
28. Lovell, P.G., Tolhurst, D.J., Parraga, C.A., Baddeley, R.J., Leonards, U., Troscianko, J.& Troscianko, T., Opponent channel responses to changes in the illuminant of natural scenes for primates and birds. Perception, 34, pp. 59, 2005.
29. Osorio, D., Ruderman, D.L.& Cronin, T.W., Estimation of errors in luminance signals encoded by primate retina resulting from sampling of natural images with red and green cones. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 15(1), pp. 16-22, 1998. doi:10.1364/JOSAA.15.000016
30. Osorio, D.& Vorobyev, M., Colour vision as an adaptation to frugivory in primates. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, Biological Sciences, 263, pp. 593-599, 1996. doi:10.1098/rspb.1996.0089 (Pubitemid 26169442)
31. Jones, C.D.& Osorio, D., Discrimination of orientated visual textures by poultry chicks. Vision Research, 44, pp. 83-89, 2004. doi:10.1016/j.visres. 2003.08.014 (Pubitemid 37346243)
32. Ghim, M.M.& Hodos, W., Spatial contrast sensitivity of birds. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 192(5), pp. 523-534, 2006. doi:10.1007/s00359-005- 0090-5
33. Troscianko, T., Benton, C.P., Lovell, P.G., Tolhurst, D.J.& Pizlo, Z., Camoufl age and visual perception. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 364(1516), pp. 449-461, 2009. doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0218
34. Bond, A.B.& Kamil, A.C., Spatial heterogeneity, predator cognition, and the evolution of color polymorphism in virtual prey. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103, pp. 3214-3219, 2006. doi:10.1073/pnas.0509963103 (Pubitemid 43346450)
35. Pietrewicz, A.T.& Kamil, A.C., Visual detection of cryptic prey by blue jays (Cyanocitta cristata). Science, 195, pp. 580-582, 1977. doi:10.1126/science.195.4278.580
36. Pietrewicz, A.T.& Kamil, A.C., Search image formation in the Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata). Science, 204, pp. 1332-1333, 1979. doi:10.1126/science. 204.4399.1332
37. Duncan, J.& Humphreys, G.W., Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96(3), pp. 433-458, 1989. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.96.3.433
38. Brady, M.J.& Kersten, D., Bootstrapped learning of novel objects. Journal of Vision, 3(6), pp. 413-422, 2003. doi:10.1167/3.6.2 (Pubitemid 39047383)
39. Behrens, R.R., The theories of Abbott H. Thayer: father of camoufl age. Leonardo, 21, pp. 291-296, 1988. doi:10.2307/1578658
40. Behrens, R.R., Art& Camoufl age, North American Review: Cedar Falls, Iowa, 1981.
41. Behrens, R.R., The role of artists in ship camoufl age during World War I. Leonardo, 32, pp. 53-59, 1999. doi:10.1162/002409499553000
42. Newark, T., Newark, Q.& Borsarello, J.F., Brassey's Book of Camoufl age, Brassey's (UK) Ltd.: Littlehampton, 1996.
43. Newark, T.& Miller, J., Camoufl age, Thames& Hudson: London, 2007.
44. Church, S.C., Bennett, A.T.D., Cuthill, I.C.& Partridge, J.C., Avian ultraviolet vision and its implications for insect protective coloration, in: eds H.V. Emden& M. Rothschild, Insect and Bird Interactions, Intercept Press: Andover, pp. 165-184, 2004.
45. Church, S.C., Bennett, A.T.D., Cuthill, I.C.& Partridge, J.C., Ultraviolet cues affect the foraging behaviour of blue tits. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 265, pp. 1509-1514, 1998. doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0465 (Pubitemid 28421122)
46. Harvey, P.H.& Pagel, M.D., The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology, Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1991.
47. Andersson, M., Sexual Selection, Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, 1994.
48. Stuart-Fox, D.& Moussalli, A., Selection for social signalling drives the evolution of chameleon colour change. PLoS Biology, 6(1), pp. e25, 2008. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060025 (Pubitemid 351226043)
49. Hanlon, R., Cephalopod dynamic camoufl age. Current Biology, 17(11), pp. R400-R404, 2007. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2007.03.034 (Pubitemid 46829824)
50. Hanlon, R.T., Forsythe, J.W.& Joneschild, D.E., Crypsis, conspicuous, mimicry and polyphenism as antipredator defences of foraging octopuses on Indo-Pacifi c coral reefs, with a method of quantifying crypsis from video tapes. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 66, pp. 1-22, 1999. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.1999.tb01914.x
51. Endler, J.A., An overview of the relationships between mimicry and crypsis. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 16(1), pp. 25-31, 1981. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.1981. tb01840.x
52. Endler, J.A., Interactions between predators and prey, in: eds J.R. Krebs& N.B. Davis, Behavioural Ecology: an Evolutionary Approach, 3rd edn, Blackwell: Oxford, pp. 169-196, 1991.
53. Endler, J.A., Frequency-dependent predation, crypsis and aposematic coloration. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 319(1196), pp. 505-523, 1988. doi:10.1098/ rstb.1988.0062
54. Cook, L.M., Changing views on melanic moths. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 69(3), pp. 431-441, 2000. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.2000.tb01215. x
55. Coyne, J.A., Of moths and men: intrigue, tragedy and the peppered moth. Nature, 418(6893), pp. 19-20, 2002. doi:10.1038/418019a
56. Ruxton, G.D., Sherratt, T.N.& Speed, M.P., Avoiding Attack, Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2004. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198528609.001.0001
57. Stevens, M.& Merilaita, S., Animal camoufl age: current issues and new perspectives. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 364, pp. 423-427, 2009. doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0217
58. Stevens, M.& Merilaita, S., Defi ning disruptive coloration and distinguishing its functions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 364(1516), pp. 481-488, 2009. doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0216
59. Merilaita, S.& Lind, J., Background-matching and disruptive coloration, and the evolution of cryptic coloration. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 272, pp. 665-670, 2005. doi:10.1098/ rspb.2004.3000
60. Stevens, M., Cuthill, I.C., Párraga, C.A.& Troscianko, T., The effectiveness of disruptive coloration as a concealment strategy, in: eds J.-M. Alonso, et al., Visual Perception (Part 2): Progress in Brain Research, vol.155, Elsevier: Amsterdam, pp. 49-65, 2006.
61. Vorobyev, M.& Osorio, D., Receptor noise as a determinant of colour thresholds. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 265, pp. 351-358, 1998. doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0302 (Pubitemid 28111918)
62. Endler, J.A.& Meilke, P.W.J., Comparing color patterns as birds see them. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 86, pp. 405-431, 2005. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.2005.00540.x (Pubitemid 41783968)
63. Lovell, P.G., Párraga, C.A., Troscianko, T., Ripamonti, C.& Tolhurst, D., Evaluation of a multiscale color model for visual difference prediction. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception, 3, pp. 155-178, 2006. doi:10.1145/1166087.1166089
64. Merilaita, S., Lyytinen, A.& Mappes, J., Selection for cryptic coloration in a visually heterogeneous habitat. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 268(1479), pp. 1925-1929, 2001. doi:10.1098/rspb.2001.1747 (Pubitemid 32897059)
65. Houston, A.I., Stevens, M.& Cuthill, I.C., Animal camoufl age: compromise or specialize in a 2 patch-type environment? Behavioral Ecology, 18, pp. 769-775, 2007. doi:10.1093/beheco/arm039 (Pubitemid 47216486)
66. Ruxton, G.D., Speed, M.P.& Kelly, D.J., What, if anything, is the adaptive function of countershading? Animal Behaviour, 68, pp. 445-451, 2004. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2003.12.009 (Pubitemid 39464499)
67. Rowland, H.M., From Abbott Thayer to the present day: what have we learned about the function of countershading? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 364(1516), pp. 519-527, 2009.
68. Kiltie, R.A., Countershading: universally deceptive or deceptively universal. Trends in Ecology& Evolution, 3(1), pp. 21-23, 1988.
69. Speed, M.P., Kelly, D.J., Davidson, A.M.& Ruxton, G.D., Countershading enhances crypsis with some bird species but not others. Behavioral Ecology, 16, pp. 327-334, 2004.
70. Edmunds, M.& Dewhirst, R.A., The survival value of countershading with wild birds as predators. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 51(4), pp. 447-452, 1994.
71. Rowland, H.M., Cuthill, I.C., Harvey, I.F., Speed, M.P.& Ruxton, G.D., Can't tell the caterpillars from the trees: countershading enhances survival in a woodland. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 275(1651), pp. 2539-2545, 2008.
72. Rowland, H.M., Speed, M.P., Ruxton, G.D., Edmunds, M., Stevens, M.& Harvey, I.F., Countershading enhances cryptic protection: an experiment with wild birds and artifi cial prey. Animal Behaviour, 74, pp. 1249-1258, 2007.
73. Cuthill, I.C., Stevens, M., Sheppard, J., Maddocks, T., Párraga, C.A.& Troscianko, T.S., Disruptive coloration and background pattern matching. Nature, 434, pp. 72-74, 2005.
74. Stevens, M., Cuthill, I.C., Windsor, A.M.M.& Walker, H.J., Disruptive contrast in animal camoufl age. Proceedings of The Royal Society B, 273(1600), pp. 2433-2438, 2006.
75. Stevens, M.& Cuthill, I.C., Disruptive coloration, crypsis and edge detection in early visual processing. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 273(1598), pp. 2141-2147, 2006.
76. Merilaita, S., Crypsis through disruptive coloration in an isopod. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 265(1401), pp. 1059-1064, 1998.
77. Schaefer, H.M.& Stobbe, N., Disruptive coloration provides vides camoufl age independent of background matching. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 273(1600), pp. 2427-2432, 2006.
78. Fraser, S., Callahan, A., Klassen, D.& Sherratt, T.N., Empirical tests of the role of disruptive coloration in reducing detectability. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 274(1615), pp. 1325-1331, 2007.
79. Endler, J.A., Disruptive and cryptic coloration. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 273, pp. 2425-2426, 2006.
80. Osorio, D.& Vorobyev, M., Photoreceptor spectral sensitivities in terrestrial animals: adaptations for luminance and colour vision. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 272, pp. 1745-1752, 2005.
81. Cuthill, I.C., Hiby, E.& Lloyd, E., The predation costs of symmetrical cryptic coloration. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 273, pp. 1267-1271, 2006.
82. Cuthill, I.C., Stevens, M., Windsor, A.M.M.& Walker, H.J., The effects of pattern symmetry on detection of disruptive and background-matching coloration. Behavioral Ecology, 17(5), pp. 828-832, 2006.
83. Merilaita, S.& Lind, J., Great tits (Parus major) searching for artifi cial prey: implications for cryptic coloration and symmetry. Behavioral Ecology, 17, pp. 84-87, 2006.
84. Osorio, D., Symmetry versus crypsis. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 9(9), pp. 346-346, 1994.
85. Swaddle, J.P., Limits to length asymmetry detection in starlings: implications for biological signalling. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 266(1426), pp. 1299-1303, 1999.
86. Cuthill, I.C.& Székely, A., Coincident disruptive coloration. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 364, pp. 489-496, 2009.
87. Levi, D.M.& Klein, S.A., Vernier acuity, crowding, and amblyopia. Vision Research, 25, pp. 979-991, 1985.
88. Pelli, D.G., Palomares, M.& Majaj, N.J., Crowding is unlike ordinary masking: distinguishing feature integration from detection. Journal of Vision, 4, pp. 1136-1169, 2004.
89. Stevens, M.S., Winney, I.S., Cantor, A.& Graham, J., Outline and surface disruption in animal camoufl age. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 276, pp. 781-786, 2009.
90. Stevens, M., Yule, D.H.& Ruxton, G.D., Dazzle coloration and prey movement. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 275, pp. 2639-2643, 2008.
91. Irwin, D.E.& Zelinsky, G.J., Eye movements and scene perception: memory for things observed. Perception& Psychophysics, 64(6), pp. 882-895, 2002.
92. Tatler, B.W., Gilchrist, I.D.& Land, M.F., Visual memory for objects in natural scenes: from fi xations to object fi les. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 58(5), pp. 931-960, 2005.
93. Neider, M.B.& Zelinsky, G.J., Searching for camoufl aged targets: effects of target-background similarity on visual search. Vision Research, 46(14), pp. 2217-2235, 2006.
94. Dimitrova, M., Stobbe, N., Schaefer, H.M.& Merilaita, S., Concealed by conspicuousness: distractive prey markings and backgrounds. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, in press, 276, pp. 1905-1910, 2009.
95. Stevens, M., Graham, J., Winney, I.S.& Cantor, A., Testing Thayer's hypothesis: can camoufl age work by distraction? Biology Letters, 4, pp. 648-650, 2008.
96. Wachtler, T., Lee, T.W.& Sejnowski, T.J., Chromatic structure of natural scenes. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 18(1), pp. 65-77, 2001.
97. Sekuler, A.B.& Bennett, P.J., Visual neuroscience: resonating to natural images. Current Biology, 11(18), pp. R733-R736, 2001.
98. Tolhurst, D.J.& Tadmor, Y., Discrimination of spectrally blended natural images: optimisation of the human visual system for encoding natural images. Perception, 29(9), pp. 1087-1100, 2000.