Testing Thayer's hypothesis: can camouflage work by distraction?

One of the oldest theories of animal camouflage predicts that apparently conspicuous markings enhance concealment. Such 'distraction' marks are hypothesized to work by drawing the viewer's attention away from salient features, such as the body outline, that would otherwise reveal the animal. If distraction marks enhance concealment, then they offer a route for animals to combine camouflage markings with conspicuous signalling strategies, such as warning signals. However, the theory has never been tested and remains controversial. By using camouflaged artificial prey presented to wild avian predators, we test whether distractive markings enhance concealment. In contrast to predictions, we find that markings, both circular and irregular shapes, increase predation compared with unmarked targets. Markings became increasingly costly as their contrast against the prey increased. Our experiments failed to find any empirical support for the hypothesis that distraction markings are an important aspect of camouflage in animals.     

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.     

The evolutionary ecology of decorating behaviour

Many animals decorate themselves through the accumulation of environmental material on their exterior. Decoration has been studied across a range of different taxa, but there are substantial limits to current understanding. Decoration in non-humans appears to function predominantly in defence against predators and parasites, although an adaptive function is often assumed rather than comprehensively demonstrated. It seems predominantly an aquatic phenomenon—presumably because buoyancy helps reduce energetic costs associated with carrying the decorative material. In terrestrial examples, decorating is relatively common in the larval stages of insects. Insects are small and thus able to generate the power to carry a greater mass of material relative to their own body weight. In adult forms, the need to be lightweight for flight probably rules out decoration. We emphasize that both benefits and costs to decoration are rarely quantified, and that costs should include those associated with collecting as well as carrying the material.     

Animal camouflage: compromise or specialize in a 2 patch-type environment?

Many animals possess camouflage markings that reduce the riskof detection by visually hunting predators. A key aspect ofcamouflage involves mimicking the background against which theanimal is viewed. However, most animals experience a wide varietyof backgrounds and cannot change their external appearance tomatch each selectively. We investigate whether such animalsshould adopt camouflage specialized with respect to one backgroundor adopt a compromise between the attributes of multiple backgrounds.We do this using a model consisting of predators that hunt preyin patches of 2 different types, where prey adopt the camouflagethat minimizes individual risk of predation. We show that theoptimal strategy of the prey is affected by a number of factors,including the relative frequencies of the patch types, the traveltime of predators between patches, the mean prey number in eachpatch type, and the trade-off function between the levels ofcrypsis in the patch types. We find evidence that both specialistand compromise strategies of prey camouflage are favored underdifferent model parameters, indicating that optimal concealmentmay not be as straightforward as previously thought.     

Marked colour divergence in the gliding membranes of a tropical lizard mirrors population differences in the colour of falling leaves

Populations of the Bornean gliding lizard, Draco cornutus, differ markedly in the colour of their gliding membranes. They also differ in local vegetation type (mangrove forest versus lowland rainforest) and consequently, the colour of falling leaves (red and brown/black in mangrove versus green, brown and black in rainforest). We show that the gliding membranes of these lizards closely match the colours of freshly fallen leaves in the local habitat as they appear to the visual system of birds (their probable predators). Furthermore, gliding membranes more closely resembled colours of local fallen leaves than standing foliage or fallen leaves in the other population''s habitat. This suggests that the two populations have diverged in gliding membrane coloration to match the colours of their local falling leaves, and that mimicking falling leaves is an adaptation that functions to reduce predation by birds.     

Concealed by conspicuousness: distractive prey markings and backgrounds

High-contrast markings, called distractive or dazzle markings, have been suggested to draw and hold the attention of a viewer, thus hindering detection or recognition of revealing prey characteristics, such as the body outline. We tested this hypothesis in a predation experiment with blue tits (Cyanistes caeruleus) and artificial prey. We also tested whether this idea can be extrapolated to the background appearance and whether high-contrast markings in the background would improve prey concealment. We compared search times for a high-contrast range prey (HC-P) and a low-contrast range prey (LC-P) in a high-contrast range background (HC-B) and a low-contrast range background (LC-B). The HC-P was more difficult to detect in both backgrounds, although it did not match the LC-B. Also, both prey types were more difficult to find in the HC-B than in the LC-B, in spite of the mismatch of the LC-P. In addition, the HC-P was more difficult to detect, in both backgrounds, when compared with a generalist prey, not mismatching either background. Thus, we conclude that distractive prey pattern markings and selection of microhabitats with distractive features may provide an effective way to improve camouflage. Importantly, high-contrast markings, both as part of the prey coloration and in the background, can indeed increase prey concealment.