Disruptive coloration provides camouflage independent of background matching

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.     

Disruptive contrast in animal camouflage

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.     

Chromaticity in the UV/blue range facilitates the search for achromatically background-matching prey in birds

A large variety of predatory species rely on their visual abilities to locate their prey. However, the search for prey may be hampered by prey camouflage. The most prominent example of concealing coloration is background-matching prey coloration characterized by a strong visual resemblance of prey to the background. Even though this principle of camouflage was recognized to efficiently work in predator avoidance a long time ago, the underlying mechanisms are not very well known. In this study, we assessed whether blue tits (Cyanistes caeruleus) use chromatic cues in the search for prey. We used two prey types that were achromatically identical but differed in chromatic properties in the UV/blue range and presented them on two achromatically identical backgrounds. The backgrounds had either the same chromatic properties as the prey items (matching combination) or differed in their chromatic properties (mismatching combination). Our results show that birds use chromatic cues in the search for mismatching prey, whereupon chromatic contrast leads to a ‘pop-out’ of the prey item from the background. When prey was presented on a matching background, search times were significantly higher. Interestingly, search for more chromatic prey on the matching background was easier than search for less chromatic prey on the matching background. Our results indicate that birds use both achromatic and chromatic cues when searching for prey, and that the combination of both cues might be helpful in the search task.     

A fish‐eye view of cuttlefish camouflage using in situ spectrometry

Cuttlefish are colour blind yet they appear to produce colour‐coordinated patterns for camouflage. Under natural in situ lighting conditions in southern Australia, we took point‐by‐point spectrometry measurements of camouflaged cuttlefish, Sepia apama, and various natural objects in the immediate visual surrounds to quantify the degree of chromatic resemblance between cuttlefish and backgrounds to potential fish predators. Luminance contrast was also calculated to determine the effectiveness of cuttlefish camouflage to this information channel both for animals with or without colour vision. Uniform body patterns on a homogeneous background of algae showed close resemblance in colour and luminance; a Uniform pattern on a partially heterogeneous background showed mixed levels of resemblance to certain background features. A Mottle pattern with some disruptive components on a heterogeneous background showed general background resemblance to some benthic objects nearest the cuttlefish. A noteworthy observation for a Disruptive body pattern on a heterogeneous background was the wide range in spectral contrasts compared to Uniform and Mottle patterns. This suggests a shift in camouflage tactic from background resemblance (which hinders detection by the predator) to more specific object resemblance and disruptive camouflage (which retards recognition). © 2013 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2013, 109 , 535–551.     

Putting the pH into phosphatidic acid signaling

Background

Camouflage patterns that hinder detection and/or recognition by antagonists are widely studied in both human and animal contexts. Patterns of contrasting stripes that purportedly degrade an observer's ability to judge the speed and direction of moving prey ('motion dazzle') are, however, rarely investigated. This is despite motion dazzle having been fundamental to the appearance of warships in both world wars and often postulated as the selective agent leading to repeated patterns on many animals (such as zebra and many fish, snake, and invertebrate species). Such patterns often appear conspicuous, suggesting that protection while moving by motion dazzle might impair camouflage when stationary. However, the relationship between motion dazzle and camouflage is unclear because disruptive camouflage relies on high-contrast markings. In this study, we used a computer game with human subjects detecting and capturing either moving or stationary targets with different patterns, in order to provide the first empirical exploration of the interaction of these two protective coloration mechanisms.

Results

Moving targets with stripes were caught significantly less often and missed more often than targets with camouflage patterns. However, when stationary, targets with camouflage markings were captured less often and caused more false detections than those with striped patterns, which were readily detected.

Conclusions

Our study provides the clearest evidence to date that some patterns inhibit the capture of moving targets, but that camouflage and motion dazzle are not complementary strategies. Therefore, the specific coloration that evolves in animals will depend on how the life history and ontogeny of each species influence the trade-off between the costs and benefits of motion dazzle and camouflage.     

Cephalopod dynamic camouflage: bridging the continuum between background matching and disruptive coloration

Individual cuttlefish, octopus and squid have the versatile capability to use body patterns for background matching and disruptive coloration. We define—qualitatively and quantitatively—the chief characteristics of the three major body pattern types used for camouflage by cephalopods: uniform and mottle patterns for background matching, and disruptive patterns that primarily enhance disruptiveness but aid background matching as well. There is great variation within each of the three body pattern types, but by defining their chief characteristics we lay the groundwork to test camouflage concepts by correlating background statistics with those of the body pattern. We describe at least three ways in which background matching can be achieved in cephalopods. Disruptive patterns in cuttlefish possess all four of the basic components of ‘disruptiveness’, supporting Cott''s hypotheses, and we provide field examples of disruptive coloration in which the body pattern contrast exceeds that of the immediate surrounds. Based upon laboratory testing as well as thousands of images of camouflaged cephalopods in the field (a sample is provided on a web archive), we note that size, contrast and edges of background objects are key visual cues that guide cephalopod camouflage patterning. Mottle and disruptive patterns are frequently mixed, suggesting that background matching and disruptive mechanisms are often used in the same pattern.     

Red trap colour of the carnivorous plant Drosera rotundifolia does not serve a prey attraction or camouflage function

The traps of many carnivorous plants are red in colour. This has been widely hypothesized to serve a prey attraction function; colour has also been hypothesized to function as camouflage, preventing prey avoidance. We tested these two hypotheses in situ for the carnivorous plant Drosera rotundifolia. We conducted three separate studies: (i) prey attraction to artificial traps to isolate the influence of colour; (ii) prey attraction to artificial traps on artificial backgrounds to control the degree of contrast and (iii) observation of prey capture by D. rotundifolia to determine the effects of colour on prey capture. Prey were not attracted to green traps and were deterred from red traps. There was no evidence that camouflaged traps caught more prey. For D. rotundifolia, there was a relationship between trap colour and prey capture. However, trap colour may be confounded with other leaf traits. Thus, we conclude that for D. rotundifolia, red trap colour does not serve a prey attraction or camouflage function.     

Function of bright coloration in the wasp spider Argiope bruennichi (Araneae: Araneidae)

There are two major competing explanations for the counter-intuitive presence of bright coloration in certain orb-web spiders. Bright coloration could lure insect prey to the web vicinity, increasing the spider's foraging success. Alternatively, the markings could function as disruptive camouflage, making it difficult for the insect prey to distinguish spiders from background colour variation. We measured the prey capture rates of wasp spiders, Argiope bruennichi, that were blacked out, shielded from view using a leaf fragment, or left naturally coloured. Naturally coloured spiders caught over twice the number of prey as did either blacked-out or leaf-shielded spiders, and almost three times as many orthopteran prey. Spectrophotometer measurements suggest that the bright yellow bands on the spider's abdomen are visible to insect prey, but not the banding on the legs, which could disguise the spider's outline. Thus, our results provide strong support for the hypothesis that bright coloration in the wasp spider acts as a visual lure for insect prey and weak support for the hypothesis that the arrangement of the banding pattern across the spider's body disguises the presence of the spider on the web.     

Keeping the band together: evidence for false boundary disruptive coloration in a butterfly

There is a recent surge of evidence supporting disruptive coloration, in which patterns break up the animal's outline through false edges or boundaries, increasing survival in animals by reducing predator detection and/or preventing recognition. Although research has demonstrated that false edges are successful for reducing predation of prey, research into the role of internal false boundaries (i.e. stripes and bands) in reducing predation remains warranted. Many animals have stripes and bands that may function disruptively. Here, we test the possible disruptive function of wing band patterning in a butterfly, Anartia fatima, using artificial paper and plasticine models in Panama. We manipulated the band so that one model type had the band shifted to the wing margin (nondisruptive treatment) and another model had a discontinuous band located on the wing margin (discontinuous edge treatment). We kept the natural wing pattern to represent the false boundary treatment. Across all treatment groups, we standardized the area of colour and used avian visual models to confirm a match between manipulated and natural wing colours. False boundary models had higher survival than either the discontinuous edge model or the nondisruptive model. There was no survival difference between the discontinuous edge model and the nondisruptive model. Our results demonstrate the importance of wing bands in reducing predation on butterflies and show that markings set in from the wing margin can reduce predation more effectively than marginal bands and discontinuous marginal patterns. This study demonstrates an adaptive benefit of having stripes and bands.     

Warning coloration can be disruptive: aposematic marginal wing patterning in the wood tiger moth

Warning (aposematic) and cryptic colorations appear to be mutually incompatible because the primary function of the former is to increase detectability, whereas the function of the latter is to decrease it. Disruptive coloration is a type of crypsis in which the color pattern breaks up the outline of the prey, thus hindering its detection. This delusion can work even when the prey's pattern elements are highly contrasting; thus, it is possible for an animal's coloration to combine both warning and disruptive functions. The coloration of the wood tiger moth (Parasemia plantaginis) is such that the moth is conspicuous when it rests on vegetation, but when it feigns death and drops to the grass‐ and litter‐covered ground, it is hard to detect. This death‐feigning behavior therefore immediately switches the function of its coloration from signaling to camouflage. We experimentally tested whether the forewing patterning of wood tiger moths could function as disruptive coloration against certain backgrounds. Using actual forewing patterns of wood tiger moths, we crafted artificial paper moths and placed them on a background image resembling a natural litter and grass background. We manipulated the disruptiveness of the wing pattern so that all (marginal pattern) or none (nonmarginal pattern) of the markings extended to the edge of the wing. Paper moths, each with a hidden palatable food item, were offered to great tits (Parus major) in a large aviary where the birds could search for and attack the “moths” according to their detectability. The results showed that prey items with the disruptive marginal pattern were attacked less often than prey without it. However, the disruptive function was apparent only when the prey was brighter than the background. These results suggest that warning coloration and disruptive coloration can work in concert and that the moth, by feigning death, can switch the function of its coloration from warning to disruptive.     

Cryptic differences in colour among Müllerian mimics: how can the visual capacities of predators and prey shape the evolution of wing colours?

Antagonistic interactions between predators and prey often lead to co‐evolution. In the case of toxic prey, aposematic colours act as warning signals for predators and play a protective role. Evolutionary convergence in colour patterns among toxic prey evolves due to positive density‐dependent selection and the benefits of mutual resemblance in spreading the mortality cost of educating predators over a larger prey assemblage. Comimetic species evolve highly similar colour patterns, but such convergence may interfere with intraspecific signalling and recognition in the prey community, especially for species involved in polymorphic mimicry. Using spectrophotometry measures, we investigated the variation in wing coloration among comimetic butterflies from distantly related lineages. We focused on seven morphs of the polymorphic species Heliconius numata and the seven corresponding comimetic species from the genus Melinaea. Significant differences in the yellow, orange and black patches of the wing were detected between genera. Perceptions of these cryptic differences by bird and butterfly observers were then estimated using models of animal vision based on physiological data. Our results showed that the most strikingly perceived differences were obtained for the contrast of yellow against a black background. The capacity to discriminate between comimetic genera based on this colour contrast was also evaluated to be higher for butterflies than for birds, suggesting that this variation in colour, likely undetectable to birds, might be used by butterflies for distinguishing mating partners without losing the benefits of mimicry. The evolution of wing colour in mimetic butterflies might thus be shaped by the opposite selective pressures exerted by predation and species recognition.     

Defining disruptive coloration and distinguishing its functions

Disruptive coloration breaks up the shape and destroys the outline of an object, hindering detection. The principle was first suggested approximately a century ago, but, although research has significantly increased, the field remains conceptually unstructured and no unambiguous definition exists. This has resulted in variable use of the term, making it difficult to formulate testable hypotheses that are comparable between studies, slowing down advancement in this field. Related to this, a range of studies do not effectively distinguish between disruption and other forms of camouflage. Here, we give a formal definition of disruptive coloration, reorganize a range of sub-principles involved in camouflage and argue that five in particular are specifically related to disruption: differential blending; maximum disruptive contrast; disruption of surface through false edges; disruptive marginal patterns; and coincident disruptive coloration. We discuss how disruptive coloration can be optimized, how it can relate to other forms of camouflage markings and where future work is particularly needed.     

Size-dependent colouration balances conspicuous aposematism and camouflage

Colour is an important component of many different defensive strategies, but signal efficacy and detectability will also depend on the size of the coloured structures, and how pattern size interacts with the background. Consequently, size-dependent changes in colouration are common among many different species as juveniles and adults frequently use colour for different purposes in different environmental contexts. A widespread strategy in many species is switching from crypsis to conspicuous aposematic signalling as increasing body size can reduce the efficacy of camouflage, while other antipredator defences may strengthen. Curiously, despite being chemically defended, the gold-striped frog (Lithodytes lineatus, Leptodactylidae) appears to do the opposite, with bright yellow stripes found in smaller individuals, whereas larger frogs exhibit dull brown stripes. Here, we investigated whether size-dependent differences in colour support distinct defensive strategies. We first used visual modelling of potential predators to assess how colour contrast varied among frogs of different sizes. We found that contrast peaked in mid-sized individuals while the largest individuals had the least contrasting patterns. We then used two detection experiments with human participants to evaluate how colour and body size affected overall detectability. These experiments revealed that larger body sizes were easier to detect, but that the colours of smaller frogs were more detectable than those of larger frogs. Taken together our data support the hypothesis that the primary defensive strategy changes from conspicuous aposematism to camouflage with increasing size, implying size-dependent differences in the efficacy of defensive colouration. We discuss our data in relation to theories of size-dependent aposematism and evaluate the evidence for and against a possible size-dependent mimicry complex with sympatric poison frogs (Dendrobatidae).     

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

Cryptic prey coloration typically bears a resemblance to the habitat the prey uses. It has been suggested that coloration which visually matches a random sample of the background maximizes background matching. We studied this previously untested hypothesis, as well as another, little studied principle of concealment, disruptive coloration, and whether it could, acting in addition to background matching, provide another plausible means of achieving camouflage. We presented great tits (Parus major) with artificial background-matching and disruptive prey (DP), and measured detection times. First, we studied whether any random sample of a background produces equally good crypsis. This turned out to not be the case. Next, we compared the DP and the best background-matching prey and found that they were equally cryptic. We repeated the tests using prey with all the coloration elements being whole, instead of some of them being broken by the prey outline, but this did not change the result. We conclude that resemblance of the background is an important aspect of concealment, but that coloration matching a random visual sample of the background is neither sufficient nor necessary to minimize the probability of detection. Further, our study lends empirical support to the principle of disruptive coloration.     

Coincident disruptive coloration

Even if an animal matches its surroundings perfectly in colour and texture, any mismatch between the spatial phase of its pattern and that of the background, or shadow created by its three-dimensional relief, is potentially revealing. Nevertheless, for camouflage to be fully broken, the shape must be recognizable. Disruptive coloration acts against object recognition by the use of high-contrast internal colour boundaries to break up shape and form. As well as the general outline, characteristic features such as eyes and limbs must also be concealed; this can be achieved by having the colour patterns on different, but adjacent, body parts aligned to match each other (i.e. in phase). Such 'coincident disruptive coloration' ensures that there is no phase disjunction where body parts meet, and causes different sections of the body to blend perceptually. We tested this theory using field experiments with predation by wild birds on artificial moth-like targets, whose wings and (edible pastry) bodies had colour patterns that were variously coincident or not. We also carried out an experiment with humans searching for analogous targets on a computer screen. Both experiments show that coincident disruptive coloration is an effective mechanism for concealing an otherwise revealing body form.     

Are Stripes Beneficial? Dazzle Camouflage Influences Perceived Speed and Hit Rates

In the animal kingdom, camouflage refers to patterns that help potential prey avoid detection. Mostly camouflage is thought of as helping prey blend in with their background. In contrast, disruptive or dazzle patterns protect moving targets and have been suggested as an evolutionary force in shaping the dorsal patterns of animals. Dazzle patterns, such as stripes and zigzags, are thought to reduce the probability with which moving prey will be captured by impairing predators'' perception of speed. We investigated how different patterns of stripes (longitudinal—i.e., parallel to movement direction–and vertical–i.e., perpendicular to movement direction) affect the probability with which humans can hit moving objects and if differences in hitting probability are caused by a misperception of speed. A first experiment showed that longitudinally striped objects were hit more often than unicolored objects. However, vertically striped objects did not differ from unicolored objects. A second study examining the link between perceived speed and hitting probability showed that longitudinally and vertically striped objects were both perceived as moving faster and were hit more often than unicolored objects. In sum, our results provide evidence that striped patterns disrupt the perception of speed, which in turn influences how often objects are hit. However, the magnitude and the direction of the effects depend on additional factors such as speed and the task setup.     

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

Two, logically distinct but sometimes compatible, mechanismsof camouflage are background-matching and disruptive coloration.In the former, an animal's coloration comprises a random sampleof the background, and so target–background discriminationis impeded. In the latter, object or feature recognition iscompromised by placing bold, high-contrast colors so that theybreak 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, hasbeen based on artificial prey with patterns lacking a planeof symmetry. However, it is plausible that the bilateral symmetrypresent in natural prey may compromise the efficiency of disruptivecoloration, on account of the potency of symmetry as a cue invisual search. In this study, we tested this prediction in thefield, by tracking the "survival" under bird predation of artificialmothlike targets placed on oak trees. These had background-matchingcolor patches placed either disruptively or nondisruptivelyand with or without bilateral symmetry. We found that symmetryreduced the effectiveness of both nondisruptive and disruptivebackground-matching coloration to a similar degree so that thenegative effects of symmetry on concealment are no greater fordisruptive than nondisruptive patterns.     

Spots, stripes, tail tips and dark eyes: Predicting the function of carnivore colour patterns using the comparative method

Animal colour patterns are adaptive for three reasons: camouflage, communication and physico-physiological functions. This study proposes a conceptual framework for predicting the main adaptive function of carnivore colour patterns based on three factors: visibility, shape and location on the body, as well as, their behavioural ecological correlates. Using a comparative phylogenetic approach, the colour patterns present on the body, the tail and the eyes of 200 species of mammalian carnivores were analysed. Their evolutionary history was reconstructed using MacClade and Maddison's concentrated-changes test was used to test the association between species' colour patterns and their behavioural ecology on a composite phylogeny for all the Carnivora. The results for dark spots, vertical stripes, horizontal stripes, ringed tails, black tail tips, white tail tips, dark eye contour and dark eye patches, are presented. The comparative analyses indicate that spotted, vertically striped and horizontally striped coats evolved for camouflage. Tail markings seem to have evolved for intra- and/or inter-specific communication, while dark markings near and around the eyes are associated with variables consistent with a physico-physiological function. These findings suggest that both the physical environment and animal behaviour are important selective factors driving the evolution of animal colour patterns and that both need to be taken into consideration in future studies of animal coloration.     

Disruptive ecological selection on a mating cue

Adaptation to divergent ecological niches can result in speciation. Traits subject to disruptive selection that also contribute to non-random mating will facilitate speciation with gene flow. Such ‘magic’ or ‘multiple-effect’ traits may be widespread and important for generating biodiversity, but strong empirical evidence is still lacking. Although there is evidence that putative ecological traits are indeed involved in assortative mating, evidence that these same traits are under divergent selection is considerably weaker. Heliconius butterfly wing patterns are subject to positive frequency-dependent selection by predators, owing to aposematism and Müllerian mimicry, and divergent colour patterns are used by closely related species to recognize potential mates. The amenability of colour patterns to experimental manipulation, independent of other traits, presents an excellent opportunity to test their role during speciation. We conducted field experiments with artificial butterflies, designed to match natural butterflies with respect to avian vision. These were complemented with enclosure trials with live birds and real butterflies. Our experiments showed that hybrid colour-pattern phenotypes are attacked more frequently than parental forms. For the first time, we demonstrate disruptive ecological selection on a trait that also acts as a mating cue.