scholarly journals Background-matching and disruptive coloration, and the evolution of cryptic coloration

2005 ◽  
Vol 272 (1563) ◽  
pp. 665-670 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sami Merilaita ◽  
Johan Lind
Keyword(s):  
Background Matching ◽  
Disruptive Coloration ◽  
Cryptic Coloration

scholarly journals Empirical tests of the role of disruptive coloration in reducing detectability

2007 ◽  
Vol 274 (1615) ◽  
pp. 1325-1331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stewart Fraser ◽  
Alison Callahan ◽  
Dana Klassen ◽  
Thomas N Sherratt
Keyword(s):  
Field Experiments ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Common Features ◽  
Background Matching ◽  
Disruptive Coloration ◽  
Oak Trees ◽  
Empirical Tests ◽  
Body Shapes ◽  
Better Than

Disruptive patterning is a potentially universal camouflage technique that is thought to enhance concealment by rendering the detection of body shapes more difficult. In a recent series of field experiments, artificial moths with markings that extended to the edges of their ‘wings’ survived at higher rates than moths with the same edge patterns inwardly displaced. While this result seemingly indicates a benefit to obscuring edges, it is possible that the higher density markings of the inwardly displaced patterns concomitantly reduced their extent of background matching. Likewise, it has been suggested that the mealworm baits placed on the artificial moths could have created differential contrasts with different moth patterns. To address these concerns, we conducted controlled trials in which human subjects searched for computer-generated moth images presented against images of oak trees. Moths with edge-extended disruptive markings survived at higher rates, and took longer to find, than all other moth types, whether presented sequentially or simultaneously. However, moths with no edge markings and reduced interior pattern density survived better than their high-density counterparts, indicating that background matching may have played a so-far unrecognized role in the earlier experiments. Our disruptively patterned non-background-matching moths also had the lowest overall survivorship, indicating that disruptive coloration alone may not provide significant protection from predators. Collectively, our results provide independent support for the survival value of disruptive markings and demonstrate that there are common features in human and avian perception of camouflage.

scholarly journals Disruptive contrast in animal camouflage

2006 ◽  
Vol 273 (1600) ◽  
pp. 2433-2438 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Stevens ◽  
Innes C Cuthill ◽  
Amy M.M Windsor ◽  
Hannah J Walker
Keyword(s):  
Background Luminance ◽  
High Contrast ◽  
Early Literature ◽  
Background Matching ◽  
Disruptive Coloration ◽  
Average Luminance ◽  
Intuitive Idea ◽  
Colour Patterns

Camouflage typically involves colour patterns that match the background. However, it has been argued that concealment may be achieved by strategic use of apparently conspicuous markings. Recent evidence supports the theory that the presence of contrasting patterns placed peripherally on an animal's body (disruptive coloration) provides survival advantages. However, no study has tested a key prediction from the early literature that disruptive coloration is effective even when some colour patches do not match the background and have a high contrast with both the background and adjacent pattern elements (disruptive contrast). We test this counter-intuitive idea that conspicuous patterns might aid concealment, using artificial moth-like targets with pattern elements designed to match or mismatch the average luminance (lightness) of the trees on which they were placed. Disruptive coloration was less effective when some pattern elements did not match the background luminance. However, even non-background-matching disruptive patterns reduced predation relative to equivalent non-disruptive patterns or to unpatterned controls. Therefore, concealment may still be achieved even when an animal possesses markings not found in the background. Disruptive coloration may allow animals to exploit backgrounds on which they are not perfectly matched, and to possess conspicuous markings while still retaining a degree of camouflage.

scholarly journals Background matching and disruptive coloration as habitat-specific strategies for camouflage

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Natasha Price ◽  
Samuel Green ◽  
Jolyon Troscianko ◽  
Tom Tregenza ◽  
Martin Stevens
Keyword(s):  
Background Matching ◽  
Disruptive Coloration

scholarly journals Contrasting coloration in terrestrial mammals

2008 ◽  
Vol 364 (1516) ◽  
pp. 537-548 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Caro
Keyword(s):  
Temperature Regulation ◽  
Functional Significance ◽  
The Body ◽  
Sexual Dichromatism ◽  
Black And White ◽  
Terrestrial Mammals ◽  
Background Matching ◽  
Disruptive Coloration ◽  
Colour Patterns ◽  
Pelage Coloration

Here I survey, collate and synthesize contrasting coloration in 5000 species of terrestrial mammals focusing on black and white pelage. After briefly reviewing alternative functional hypotheses for coloration in mammals, I examine nine colour patterns and combinations on different areas of the body and for each mammalian taxon to try to identify the most likely evolutionary drivers of contrasting coloration. Aposematism and perhaps conspecific signalling are the most consistent explanations for black and white pelage in mammals; background matching may explain white pelage. Evidence for contrasting coloration is being involved in crypsis through pattern blending, disruptive coloration or serving other functions, such as signalling dominance, lures, reducing eye glare or in temperature regulation has barely moved beyond anecdotal stages of investigation. Sexual dichromatism is limited in this taxon and its basis is unclear. Astonishingly, the functional significance of pelage coloration in most large charismatic black and white mammals that were new to science 150 years ago still remains a mystery.

scholarly journals Disruptive coloration provides camouflage independent of background matching

2006 ◽  
Vol 273 (1600) ◽  
pp. 2427-2432 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Martin Schaefer ◽  
Nina Stobbe
Keyword(s):  
Body Shape ◽  
The Body ◽  
Cognitive Mechanisms ◽  
Proximate Mechanisms ◽  
Background Matching ◽  
Prey Recognition ◽  
Heterogeneous Habitats ◽  
Disruptive Coloration ◽  
Fitness Benefits ◽  
Better Than

Natural selection shapes the evolution of anti-predator defences, such as camouflage. It is currently contentious whether crypsis and disruptive coloration are alternative mechanisms of camouflage or whether they are interrelated anti-predator defences. Disruptively coloured prey is characterized by highly contrasting patterns to conceal the body shape, whereas cryptic prey minimizes the contrasts to background. Determining bird predation of artificial moths, we found that moths which were dissimilar from the background but sported disruptive patterns on the edge of their wings survived better in heterogeneous habitats than did moths with the same patterns inside of the wings and better than cryptic moths. Despite lower contrasts to background, crypsis did not provide fitness benefits over disruptive coloration on the body outline. We conclude that disruptive coloration on the edge camouflages its bearer independent of background matching. We suggest that this result is explainable because disruptive coloration is effective by exploiting predators' cognitive mechanisms of prey recognition and not their sensory mechanisms of signal detection. Relative to disruptive patterns on the body outline, disruptive markings on the body interior are less effective. Camouflage owing to disruptive coloration on the body interior is background-specific and is as effective as crypsis in heterogeneous habitats. Hence, we hypothesize that two proximate mechanisms explain the diversity of visual anti-predator defences. First, disruptive coloration on the body outline provides camouflage independent of the background. Second, background matching and disruptive coloration on the body interior provide camouflage, but their protection is background-specific.

scholarly journals Camouflage through behavior in moths: the role of background matching and disruptive coloration

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Changku Kang ◽  
Martin Stevens ◽  
Jong-yeol Moon ◽  
Sang-Im Lee ◽  
Piotr G. Jablonski
Keyword(s):  
Background Matching ◽  
Disruptive Coloration

scholarly journals Disruptive camouflage impairs object recognition

2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 20130501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard J. Webster ◽  
Christopher Hassall ◽  
Chris M. Herdman ◽  
Jean-Guy J. Godin ◽  
Thomas N. Sherratt
Keyword(s):  
Object Recognition ◽  
Eye Tracking ◽  
Experimental Evidence ◽  
Tracking Data ◽  
Background Matching ◽  
Direct Experimental Evidence ◽  
Search Tasks ◽  
Disruptive Coloration ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Salient Features

Whether hiding from predators, or avoiding battlefield casualties, camouflage is widely employed to prevent detection. Disruptive coloration is a seemingly well-known camouflage mechanism proposed to function by breaking up an object's salient features (for example their characteristic outline), rendering objects more difficult to recognize. However, while a wide range of animals are thought to evade detection using disruptive patterns, there is no direct experimental evidence that disruptive coloration impairs recognition. Using humans searching for computer-generated moth targets, we demonstrate that the number of edge-intersecting patches on a target reduces the likelihood of it being detected, even at the expense of reduced background matching. Crucially, eye-tracking data show that targets with more edge-intersecting patches were looked at for longer periods prior to attack, and passed-over more frequently during search tasks. We therefore show directly that edge patches enhance survivorship by impairing recognition, confirming that disruptive coloration is a distinct camouflage strategy, not simply an artefact of background matching.

Two ways to hide: predator and prey perspectives of disruptive coloration and background matching in jumping spiders

2017 ◽  
Vol 122 (4) ◽  
pp. 752-764 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis E Robledo-Ospina ◽  
Federico Escobar-Sarria ◽  
Jolyon Troscianko ◽  
Dinesh Rao
Keyword(s):  
Jumping Spiders ◽  
Background Matching ◽  
Disruptive Coloration
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document