Pattern recognition algorithm reveals how birds evolve individual egg pattern signatures

Nature Communications

Volumn 5, Issue , 2014, Pages

  Stoddard, Mary Caswell ^a,b   Kilner, Rebecca M ^c   Town, Christopher ^c  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; BIRD; CHEATING BEHAVIOR; COMPUTER VISION; EGG; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; FIGHTING; MIMICRY; PATTERN RECOGNITION; VISUAL ANALYSIS;

ALGORITHM; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; BIRD; COGNITION; COMPUTER; CUCULUS CANORUS; EGG; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; HOST; NONHUMAN; PATTERN RECOGNITION; VISION; ANIMAL; AUTOMATED PATTERN RECOGNITION; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; EGG SHELL; PHYSIOLOGY; PIGMENTATION; PROCEDURES; RECOGNITION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; BIRDS; EGG SHELL; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; PIGMENTATION; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

EID: 84902846907     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20411723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms5117     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Johnstone, R. A. Recognition and the evolution of distinctive signatures: when does it pay to reveal identity? Proc. R. Soc. B 264, 1547-1553 (1997). (Pubitemid 27480713)
2. Tibbetts, E. A. & Dale, J. Individual recognition: it is good to be different. Trends Ecol. Evol. 22, 529-537 (2007). (Pubitemid 47562151)
3. Martin, S. J., Helanterä, H. & Drijfhout, F. P. Colony-specific hydrocarbons identify nest mates in two species of Formica ant. J. Chem. Ecol. 34, 1072-1080 (2008).
4. Pitcher, B. J., Harcourt, R. G. & Charrier, I. Individual identity encoding and environmental constraints in vocal recognition of pups by Australian sea lion mothers. Anim. Behav. 83, 681-690 (2012).
5. Sheehan, M. J. & Tibbetts, E. A. Specialized face learning is associated with individual recognition in paper wasps. Science 334, 1272-1275 (2011).
6. Gaston, A. J., De Forest, L. N. & Noble, D. G. Egg recognition and egg stealing in murres Uria spp. Anim. Behav. 45, 301-306 (1993). (Pubitemid 23402730)
7. Kilner, R. M. The evolution of egg colour and patterning in birds. Biol. Rev. 81, 383-406 (2006). (Pubitemid 44109656)
8. Beecher, M. D. Signalling systems for individual recognition: an information theory approach. Anim. Behav. 38, 248-261 (1989).
9. Davies, N. B. Cuckoos, Cowbirds and Other Cheats (T & AD Poyser, 2000).
10. Kilner, R. M. & Langmore, N. E. Cuckoos versus hosts in insects and birds: adaptations, counter-adaptations and outcomes. Biol. Rev. 86, 836-852 (2011).
11. Brooke, M. D. & Davies, N. B. Egg mimicry by cuckoos Cuculus canorus in relation to discrimination by hosts. Nature 335, 630-632 (1988). (Pubitemid 19319967)
12. Avilés, J. M. Egg colour mimicry in the common cuckoo Cuculus canorus as revealed by modelling host retinal function. Proc. R. Soc. B 275, 2345-2352 (2008).
13. Stoddard, M. C. & Stevens, M. Pattern mimicry of host eggs by the common cuckoo, as seen through a bird's eye. Proc. R. Soc. B 277, 1387-1393 (2010).
14. Stoddard, M. C. & Stevens, M. Avian vision and the evolution of egg color mimicry in the common cuckoo. Evolution 65, 2004-2013 (2011).
15. Spottiswoode, C. N. & Stevens, M. How to evade a coevolving brood parasite: egg discrimination versus egg variability as host defences. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 3566-3573 (2011).
16. Lahti, D. C. Evolution of bird eggs in the absence of cuckoo parasitism. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 18057-18062 (2005). (Pubitemid 41798501)
17. Swynnerton, C. Rejections by birds of eggs unlike their own: with remarks on some of the cuckoo problems. Ibis 60, 127-154 (1918).
18. ∅ien, I. J., Moksnes, A. & Røskaft, E. Evolution of variation in egg color and marking pattern in European passerines: adaptations in a coevolutionary arms race with the cuckoo Cuculus canorus. Behav. Ecol. 6, 166-174 (1995). (Pubitemid 26451458)
19. Davies, N. & Brooke, M. L. An experimental study of co-evolution between the cuckoo, Cuculus canorus, and its hosts. II. Host egg markings, chick discrimination and general discussion. J. Anim. Ecol. 58, 225-236 (1989). (Pubitemid 19325335)
20. Victoria, J. Clutch characteristics and egg discriminative ability of the African Village Weaverbird Ploceus cucullatus. Ibis 114, 367-376 (1972).
21. Soler, J. J. & Møller, A. P. A comparative analysis of the evolution of variation in appearance of eggs of European passerines in relation to brood parasitism. Behav. Ecol. 7, 89-94 (1996).
22. Stokke, B. G., Moksnes, A. & Røskaft, E. Obligate brood parasites as selective agents for evolution of egg appearance in passerine birds. Evolution 56, 199-205 (2002). (Pubitemid 34243811)
23. Stevens, M. Avian vision and egg colouration: concepts and measurements. Avian Biol. Res 4, 168-184 (2011).
24. Stoddard, M. C. Mimicry and masquerade from the avian visual perspective. Curr. Zool. 58, 630-648 (2012).
25. Safran, R. J. & Vitousek, M. N. Evolutionary biology: arms races in the eye of the beholder. Curr. Biol. 18, R734-R736 (2008).
26. Lowe, D. G. Object recognition from local scale-invariant features. Proc Seventh IEEE Int. Conf. Computer Vision (IEEE) 2, 1150-1157 (1999).
27. Lowe, D. G. Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. Int. J. Comput. Vision 60, 91-110 (2004).
28. Soto, F. A. & Wasserman, E. A. Visual object categorization in birds and primates: integrating behavioral, neurobiological, and computational evidence within a 'general process' framework. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 12, 220-204 (2012).
29. Lowe, D. G. Towards a computational model for object recognition in IT cortex. in Biologically Motivated Computer Vision 20-31 (2000).
30. Jones, C. & Osorio, D. Discrimination of oriented visual textures by poultry chicks. Vision Res. 44, 83-89 (2004). (Pubitemid 37346243)
31. Zhang, W., Yang, H., Samaras, D. & Zelinsky, G. A computational model of eye movements during object class detection. Adv. Neural Inf. Process Syst. 18, 1609-1616 (2006).
32. Konen, C. S. & Kastner, S. Two hierarchically organized neural systems for object information in human visual cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 11, 224-231 (2008). (Pubitemid 351170496)
33. Ullman, S., Vidal-Naquet, M. & Sali, E. Visual features of intermediate complexity and their use in classification. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 682-687 (2002). (Pubitemid 34742985)
34. Soto, F. A., Siow, J. Y. M. & Wasserman, E. A. View-invariance learning in object recognition by pigeons depends on error-driven associative learning processes. Vision Res. 62, 148-161 (2012).
35. Pinto, N., Doukhan, D., DiCarlo, J. J. & Cox, D. D. A high-throughput screening approach to discovering good forms of biologically inspired visual representation. PLoS Comp. Biol. 5, e1000579 (2009).
36. Avilés, J. & Garamszegi, L. Egg rejection and brain size among potential hosts of the common cuckoo. Ethology 113, 562-572 (2007). (Pubitemid 47164753)
37. Bagnoli, F., Bignone, F., Cecconi, F. & Politi, A. Information complexity and biology. in The Kolmogorov Legacy in Physics 1, 123-146 (2003).
38. Donderi, D. C. Visual complexity: a review. Psychol. Bull. 132, 73-97 (2006). (Pubitemid 43172353)
39. Moskát, C. et al. Discordancy or template-based recognition? Dissecting the cognitive basis of the rejection of foreign eggs in hosts of avian brood parasites. J. Exp. Biol. 213, 1976-1983 (2010).
40. Takasu, F. Co-evolutionary dynamics of egg appearance in avian brood parasitism. Evol. Ecol. Res 5, 345-362 (2003). (Pubitemid 38681688)
41. Stoddard, M. C., Fayet, A. L., Kilner, R. M. & Hinde, C. A. Egg speckling patterns do not advertise offspring quality or influence male provisioning in great tits. PLoS ONE 7, e40211 (2012).
42. Serre, T. & Poggio, T. A neuromorphic approach to computer vision. Commun. ACM 53, 54-61 (2010).
43. Stevens, M., Párraga, C. A., Cuthill, I. C., Partridge, J. C. & Troscianko, T. S. Using digital photography to study animal coloration. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 90, 211-237 (2007). (Pubitemid 46192765)
44. Hart, N. S., Partridge, J. C., Cuthill, I. C. & Bennett, A. T. D. Visual pigments, oil droplets, ocular media and cone photoreceptor distribution in two species of passerine bird: the blue tit (Parus caeruleus L.) and the blackbird (Turdus merula L.). J. Comp. Physiol. A. 186, 375-387 (2000). (Pubitemid 30308587)
45. Hart, N. & Hunt, D. Avian visual pigments: characteristics, spectral tuning, and evolution. Am. Nat. 169, 7-26 (2007).
46. Zhang, Z., Jin, L., Ding, K. & Gao, X. Character-SIFT: a novel feature for offline handwritten Chinese character recognition. Doc. Anal. Recognit. (IEEE) 763-767 (2009).
47. Pan, X. & Lyu, S. Detecting image region duplication using SIFT features. Acoust. Speech Signal Process (IEEE) 1706-1709 (2010).
48. de Zeeuw, P., Pauwels, E., Ranguelova, E., Buonantony, D. & Eckert, S. Computer assisted photo identification of Dermochelys coriacea. Proc. Int. Conf. Pattern Recognit 165-172 (2010).
49. Town, C., Marshall, A. & Sethasathien, N. Manta Matcher: automated photographic identification of manta rays using keypoint features. Ecol. Evol. 3, 1902-1914 (2013).