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 camouflage impairs object recognition

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Background matching,disruptive coloration,and differential use of microhabitats in two neotropical grasshoppers with sexual dichromatism

Cryptic coloration is an adaptative defensive mechanism against predators. Color patterns can become cryptic through background coloration‐matching and disruptive coloration. Disruptive coloration may evolve in visually heterogeneous microhabitats, whereas background matching could be favored in chromatically homogeneous microhabitats. In this work, we used digital photography to explore the potential use of disruptive coloration and background matching in males and females of two grasshopper species of the Sphenarium genus in different habitats. We found chromatic differences in the two grasshopper species that may be explained by local adaptation. We also found that the females and males of both species are dichromatic and seem to follow different color cryptic strategies, males are more disruptive than females, whereas females have a high background matching with less disruptive elements. The selective pressures of the predators in different microhabitats and the differences in mobility between sexes may explain the color pattern divergence between females and males. Nevertheless, more field experiments are needed in order to understand the relative importance of disruptive and background matching coloration in the evolution of sexual dichromatism in these grasshoppers.     

Perception of visual texture and the expression of disruptive camouflage by the cuttlefish, Sepia officinalis

Juvenile cuttlefish (Sepia officinalis) camouflage themselves by changing their body pattern according to the background. This behaviour can be used to investigate visual perception in these molluscs and may also give insight into camouflage design. Edge detection is an important aspect of vision, and here we compare the body patterns that cuttlefish produced in response to checkerboard backgrounds with responses to backgrounds that have the same spatial frequency power spectrum as the checkerboards, but randomized spatial phase. For humans, phase randomization removes visual edges. To describe the cuttlefish body patterns, we scored the level of expression of 20 separate pattern 'components', and then derived principal components (PCs) from these scores. After varimax rotation, the first component (PC1) corresponded closely to the so-called disruptive body pattern, and the second (PC2) to the mottle pattern. PC1 was predominantly expressed on checkerboards, and PC2 on phase-randomized backgrounds. Thus, cuttlefish probably have edge detectors that control the expression of disruptive pattern. Although the experiments used unnatural backgrounds, it seems probable that cuttlefish display disruptive camouflage when there are edges in the visual background caused by discrete objects such as pebbles. We discuss the implications of these findings for our understanding of disruptive camouflage.     

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.     

Teasing apart crypsis and aposematism – evidence that disruptive coloration reduces predation on a noxious toad

Both cryptic and aposematic colour patterns can reduce predation risk to prey. These distinct strategies may not be mutually exclusive, because the impact of prey coloration depends on a predator's sensory system and cognition and on the environmental background. Determining whether prey signals are cryptic or aposematic is a prerequisite for understanding the ecological and evolutionary implications of predator–prey interactions. This study investigates whether coloration and pattern in an exceptionally polymorphic toad, Rhinella alata, from Barro Colorado Island, Panama reduces predation via background matching, disruptive coloration, and/or aposematic signaling. When clay model replicas of R. alata were placed on leaf litter, the model's dorsal pattern – but not its colour – affected attack rates by birds. When models were placed on white paper, patterned and un‐patterned replicas had similar attack rates by birds. These results indicate that dorsal patterns in R. alata are functionally cryptic and emphasize the potential effectiveness of disruptive coloration in a vertebrate taxon.     

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.     

Empirical tests of the role of disruptive coloration in reducing detectability

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Enhancement of chromatic contrast increases predation risk for striped butterflies

Many prey species have evolved defensive colour patterns to avoid attacks. One type of camouflage, disruptive coloration, relies on contrasting patterns that hinder predators' ability to recognize an object. While high contrasts are used to facilitate detection in many visual communication systems, they are thought to provide misleading information about prey appearance in disruptive patterns. A fundamental tenet in disruptive coloration theory is the principle of 'maximum disruptive contrast', i.e. disruptive patterns are more effective when higher contrasts are involved. We tested this principle in highly contrasting stripes that have often been described as disruptive patterns. Varying the strength of chromatic contrast between stripes and adjacent pattern elements in artificial butterflies, we found a strong negative correlation between survival probability and chromatic contrast strength. We conclude that too high a contrast leads to increased conspicuousness rather than to effective camouflage. However, artificial butterflies that sported contrasts similar to those of the model species Limenitis camilla survived equally well as background-matching butterflies without these stripes. Contrasting stripes do thus not necessarily increase predation rates. This result may provide new insights into the design and characteristics of a range of colour patterns such as sexual, mimetic and aposematic signals.     

Cuttlefish camouflage: context-dependent body pattern use during motion

It is virtually impossible to camouflage a moving target against a non-uniform background, but strategies have been proposed to reduce detection and targeting of movement. Best known is the idea that high contrast markings produce ‘motion dazzle’, which impairs judgement of speed and trajectory. The ability of the cuttlefish Sepia officinalis to change its visual appearance allows us to compare the animal''s choice of patterns during movement to the predictions of models of motion camouflage. We compare cuttlefish body patterns used during movement with those expressed when static on two background types; one of which promotes low-contrast mottle patterns and the other promotes high-contrast disruptive patterns. We find that the body pattern used during motion is context-specific and that high-contrast body pattern components are significantly reduced during movement. Thus, in our experimental conditions, cuttlefish do not use high contrast motion dazzle. It may be that, in addition to being inherently conspicuous during movement, moving high-contrast patterns will attract attention because moving particles in coastal waters tend to be of small size and of low relative contrast.     

Crypsis, conspicuousness, mimicry and polyphenism as antipredator defences of foraging octopuses on Indo-Pacific coral reefs, with a method of quantifying crypsis from video tapes

We tested the hypothesis that soft-bodied octopuses, which spend most of their lives in dens, remain highly cryptic as their primary defence against predation while they forage. We videotaped foraging octopuses on two widely dispersed Pacific coral reefs and developed a rigorous method to analyse the degree of crypsis from videotapes. Five ranks were assigned (two of‘ highly cryptic’, one of ‘moderately cryptic’, and two of ‘conspicuous’) to assess each octopus's body pattern match to its background, using the criteria of brightness, colour, shape and skin patterning. The data do not support the hypothesis. In Tahiti, octopuses were highly cryptic only 54%, moderately cryptic 24% and conspicuous 22% of the time. In Palau, the respective calculations were 31 %, 19% and 50%. A major feature of their behaviour was their remarkable ability to instantly change their body pattern, or phenotype, by direct neural control of the skin. Six chronic and nine acute categories of body patterns were observed. On average, octopuses changed their phenotype 2.95 times/minute, or 177 times per hour, based upon 7.5 hours of videotaped foraging. This rapid neurally controlled polyphenism was used most often to adjust their appearance as they foraged slowly across highly diverse substrates, thus implementing appropriate mechanisms of crypsis over each (e.g. general background resemblance, deceptive resemblance, disruptive coloration). However, when crawling rapidly, or swimming for short distances, octopuses often engaged a second antipredator lactic that was conspicuous: mimicking fishes or showing bold disruptive patterns that rendered them visibly different from an octopus. Nevertheless, sometimes they were simply conspicuous even when moving slowly, particularly in Palau, where the octopuses were larger, there was a high degree of mating“, and fewer signs of predation were evident. The results suggest that, while foraging, the overall strategy is to use polyphenism to produce ‘apparent rarity’ of any single phenotype (or search image) through mechanisms of crypsis, conspicuousness and mimicry, all of which are guided by keen vision in this marine invertebrate.     

Visual Ecology and Perception of Coloration Patterns by Domestic Chicks

This article suggests how we might understand the way potential predators see coloration patterns used in aposematism and visual mimicry. We start by briefly reviewing work on evolutionary function of eyes and neural mechanisms of vision. Often mechanisms used for achromatic vision are accurately modeled as adaptations for detection and recognition of the generality of optical stimuli, rather than specific stimuli such as biological signals. Colour vision is less well understood, but for photoreceptor spectral sensitivities of birds and hymenopterans there is no evidence for adaptations to species-specific stimuli, such as those of food or mates. Turning to experimental work, we investigate how achromatic and chromatic stimuli are used for object recognition by foraging domestic chicks (Gallus gallus). Chicks use chromatic and achromatic signals in different ways: discrimination of large targets uses (chromatic) colour differences, and chicks remember chromatic signals accurately. However, detection of small targets, and discrimination of visual textures requires achromatic contrast. The different roles of chromatic and achromatic information probably reflect their utility for object recognition in nature. Achromatic (intensity) variation exceeds chromatic variation, and hence is more informative about change in reflectance – for example, object borders, while chromatic signals yield more information about surface reflectance (object colour) under variable illumination. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Resting orientation enhances prey survival on strongly structured background

Prey can use various camouflage types as defense against predators. One of the most common and important types is background matching, which occurs if an animal matches the background in color, brightness, and pattern. Although background matching has been studied intensively, the effects of the resting orientation of prey on the effectiveness of camouflage through background matching are not well known in natural conditions. Several past experimental studies have been conducted on resting orientation in the lab often using the visual system of humans. Their results revealed that the detection rates of predators hinge on the combination of the resting orientation of artificial moths and their background. Here, we studied whether survival rates of artificial moth-like models depend on their resting orientation in the wild where the visual conditions and detection distances vary. We used a 2 × 2 design of two resting positions of a horizontally and a vertically striped morph on tree bark. Our results show that the survival probability of moths depended mainly on the orientation of stripes relative to the vertical structure of tree bark. Thus, resting orientation relative to background affected survival. After reanalyzing Endler’s (Biol J Linn Soc 22:187–231, 1984) data on resting habitats of 317 species of North American moths, we found that horizontally striped moths occurred frequently on small herbs and tree bark. We suggest that it would be beneficial for striped moths to orient non-randomly on strongly structured background, like furrows of tree bark. We further suggest that background matching was more important than coincident disruptive coloration in determining the survival rates of our artificial moths.