Skip Navigation


Behavioral Ecology Advance Access originally published online on June 19, 2006
Behavioral Ecology 2006 17(5):828-832; doi:10.1093/beheco/arl015
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
17/5/828    most recent
arl015v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cuthill, I. C.
Right arrow Articles by Walker, H. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Cuthill, I. C.
Right arrow Articles by Walker, H. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

The effects of pattern symmetry on detection of disruptive and background-matching coloration

Innes C. Cuthill, Martin Stevens, Amy M.M. Windsor and Hannah J. Walker

School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 1UG, UK

Address correspondence to I.C. Cuthill. E-mail Address: i.cuthill{at}bristol.ac.uk.

Two, logically distinct but sometimes compatible, mechanisms of camouflage are background-matching and disruptive coloration. In the former, an animal's coloration comprises a random sample of the background, and so target–background discrimination is impeded. In the latter, object or feature recognition is compromised by placing bold, high-contrast colors so that they break up the prey's body into apparently unconnected objects. Recent experimental evidence for the utility of disruptive colors, above and beyond that conferred by background matching, has been based on artificial prey with patterns lacking a plane of symmetry. However, it is plausible that the bilateral symmetry present in natural prey may compromise the efficiency of disruptive coloration, on account of the potency of symmetry as a cue in visual search. In this study, we tested this prediction in the field, by tracking the "survival" under bird predation of artificial mothlike targets placed on oak trees. These had background-matching color patches placed either disruptively or nondisruptively and with or without bilateral symmetry. We found that symmetry reduced the effectiveness of both nondisruptive and disruptive background-matching coloration to a similar degree so that the negative effects of symmetry on concealment are no greater for disruptive than nondisruptive patterns.

Key words: bird vision, camouflage, crypsis, disruptive coloration, symmetry, visual search.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Behav EcolHome page
M. Stevens, C. J. Hardman, and C. L. Stubbins
Conspicuousness, not eye mimicry, makes "eyespots" effective antipredator signals
Behav. Ecol., February 13, 2008; (2008) arm162v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Exp. Biol.Home page
A. Barbosa, L. M. Mathger, C. Chubb, C. Florio, C.-C. Chiao, and R. T. Hanlon
Disruptive coloration in cuttlefish: a visual perception mechanism that regulates ontogenetic adjustment of skin patterning
J. Exp. Biol., April 1, 2007; 210(7): 1139 - 1147.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.