Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T23:25:41.546Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - Animal camouflage

Function and mechanisms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Martin Stevens
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Sami Merilaita
Affiliation:
Åbo Akademi University, Finland
Martin Stevens
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Sami Merilaita
Affiliation:
Åbo Akademi University, Finland
Get access

Summary

One cannot help being impressed by the near-perfect camouflage of a moth matching the colour and pattern of the tree on which it rests, or of the many examples in nature of animals resembling other objects in order to be hidden (Figure 1.1). The Nobel Prize winning ethologist Niko Tinbergen referred to such moths as ‘bark with wings’ (Tinbergen 1974), such was the impressiveness of their camouflage. On a basic level, camouflage can be thought of as the property of an object that renders it difficult to detect or recognise by virtue of its similarity to its environment (Stevens & Merilaita 2009a). The advantage of being concealed from predators (or sometimes from prey) is easy to understand, and camouflage has long been used as a classical example of natural selection. Perhaps for this reason, until recently, camouflage was subject to little rigorous experimentation – its function and value seemed obvious. However, like any theory, the possible advantages of camouflage, and how it works, need rigorous scientific testing. Furthermore, as we shall see below and in this book in general, the concept of concealment is much richer, more complex and interesting than scientists originally thought.

Type
Chapter
Information
Animal Camouflage
Mechanisms and Function
, pp. 1 - 16
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, G. 1879. The Colour-Sense: Its Origin and Development An Essay in Comparative Psychology. London: Trübner.Google Scholar
Beddard, F. E. 1895. Animal Coloration; An Account of the Principle Facts and Theories Relating to the Colours and Markings of Animals, 2nd edn. London: Swan Sonnenschein.Google Scholar
Behrens, R. R. 1988. The theories of Abbott H. Thayer: father of camouflage. Leonardo, 21, 291–296.Google Scholar
Behrens, R. R. 1999. The role of artists in ship camouflage during world war I. Leonardo, 32, 53–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behrens, R. R. 2002. False Colors: Art, Design and Modern Camouflage. Dysart, IA: Bobolink Books.Google Scholar
Behrens, R. R. 2009. Revisiting Abbott Thayer: non-scientific reflections about camouflage in art, war and zoology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 364, 497–501.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bond, A. B. & Kamil, A. C. 2002. Visual predators select for crypticity and polymorphism in virtual prey. Nature, 415, 609–613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bond, A. B. & Kamil, A. C. 2006. Spatial heterogeneity, predator cognition, and the evolution of color polymorphism in virtual prey. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 103, 3214–3219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caro, T. 2009. Contrasting colouration in terrestrial mammals. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 364, 537–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caro, T., Merilaita, S. & Stevens, M. 2008. The colours of animals: from Wallace to the present day. I. cryptic colouration. In Natural Selection and Beyond: The Intellectual Legacy of Alfred Russel Wallace, eds. Smith, C. H. & Beccaloni, G.Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 125–143.Google Scholar
Carvalho, L. N., Zuanon, J. & Sazima, I. 2006. The almost invisible league: crypsis and association between minute fishes and shrimps as a possible defence against visually hunting predators. Neotropical Ichthyology, 4, 219–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Church, S. C., Bennett, A. T. D., Cuthill, I. C.et al. 1998. Does lepidopteran larval crypsis extend into the ultraviolet? Naturwissenschaften, 85, 189–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claes, J. M. & Mallefet, J. 2010. The lantern shark's light switch: turning shallow water crypsis into midwater camouflage. Biology Letters, 6, 685–687.CrossRef
Cook, L. M. 2000. Changing views on melanic moths. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 69, 431–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, L. M. 2003. The rise and fall of the carbonaria form of the peppered moth. Quarterly Review of Biology, 78, 399–417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cook, L. M., Mani, G. S. & Varley, M. E. 1986. Postindustrial melanism in the peppered moth. Science, 231, 611–613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cott, H. B. 1940. Adaptive Coloration in Animals. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Cott, H. B. 1956. Zoological Photography in Practice: A Contribution to the Technique and Art of Wild Animal Portraiture. London: Fountain Press.Google Scholar
Coyne, J. A. 2002. Evolution under pressure: a look at the controversy about industrial melanism in the peppered moth. Review of Hooper 2002, Of Moths and Men: Intrigue, Tragedy and the Peppered Moth. Nature, 418, 19–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuthill, I. C., Stevens, M., Sheppard, J.et al. 2005. Disruptive coloration and background pattern matching. Nature, 434, 72–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuthill, I. C., Stevens, M., Windsor, A. M. M. & Walker, H. J. 2006. The effects of pattern symmetry on the anti-predator effectiveness of disruptive and background matching coloration. Behavioral Ecology, 17, 828–832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darst, C., Cummings, M. E. & Cannatella, D. C. 2006. A mechanism for diversity in warning signals: conspicuousness versus toxicity in poison frogs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 103, 5852–5857.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Darwin, C. R. 1859. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Darwin, E. 1794. Zoonomia. London: Johnson.Google Scholar
di Cesnola, A. P. 1904. Preliminary note on the protective value of colour in Mantis religiosa. Biometrika, 3, 58–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimitrova, M. & Merilaita, S. 2010. Prey concealment: visual background complexity and prey contrast distribution. Behavioral Ecology, 21, 176–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimitrova, M., Stobbe, N., Schaefer, H. M. & Merilaita, S. 2009. Concealed by conspicuousness: distractive prey markings and backgrounds. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 276, 1905–1910.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edmunds, M. 1974. Defence in Animals: A Survey of Antipredator Defences. Harlow, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Endler, J. A. 1978. A predator's view of animal color patterns. Evolutionary Biology, 11, 319–364.Google Scholar
Endler, J. A. 1984. Progressive background matching in moths, and a quantitative measure of crypsis. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 22, 187–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, S., Callahan, A., Klassen, D. & Sherratt, T. N. 2007. Empirical tests of the role of disruptive coloration in reducing detectability. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 274, 1325–1331.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glendinning, P. 2004. The mathematics of motion camouflage. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 271, 477–481.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Godfrey, D., Lythgoe, J. N. & Rumball, D. A. 1987. Zebra stripes and tiger stripes: the spatial frequency distribution of the pattern compared to that of the background is significant in display and crpsis. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 32, 427–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, B. S. 2002. Sour grapes of wrath. Review of Hooper 2002, Of Moths and Men: Intrigue, Tragedy and the Peppered Moth. Science, 297, 940–941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, B. S., Owen, D. F. & Clarke, C. A. 1996. Parallel rise and fall of melanic peppered moths in America and Britain. Journal of Heredity, 87, 351–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanlon, R. T. 2007. Cephalopod dynamic camouflage. Current Biology, 17, 400–404.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanlon, R. T. & Messenger, J. B. 1988. Adaptive coloration in young cuttlefish (Sepia officinalis L.): the morphology and development of body patterns and their relation to behavior. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 320, 437–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanlon, R. T., Chiao, C. C., Mäthger, L. M.et al. 2009. Cephalopod dynamic camouflage: bridging the continuum between general resemblance and disruptive coloration. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 364, 429–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hebert, P. D. N. 1974. Spittlebug morph mimics avian excrement. Nature, 150, 352–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooper, J. 2002. Of Moths and Men: Intrigue, Tragedy and the Peppered Moth. London: Fourth Estate.Google Scholar
Houston, A. I., Stevens, M. & Cuthill, I. C. 2007. Animal camouflage: compromise or specialise in a two patch-type environment? Behavioral Ecology, 18, 769–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hultgren, K. M. & Stachowicz, J. J. 2008. Alternative camouflage strategies mediate predation risk among closely related co-occurring kelp crabs. Oecologia, 55, 519–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, J. F., Ingram, W. & Campbell, H. W. 1976. The dorsal pigmentation pattern of snakes as an antipredator strategy: a multivariate approach. American Naturalist, 110, 1029–1053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnsen, S. 2001. Hidden in plain sight: the ecology and physiology of organismal transparency. Biological Bulletin, 201, 301–318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnsen, S., Widder, E. A. & Mobley, C. D. 2004. Propagation and perception of bioluminescence: factors affecting counterillumination as a cryptic strategy. Biological Bulletin, 207, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelman, E. J., Baddeley, R., Shohet, A. & Osorio, D. 2007. Perception of visual texture, and the expression of disruptive camouflage by the cuttlefish, Sepia officinalis. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 274, 1369–1375.CrossRef
Kettlewell, H. B. D. 1955. Selection experiments on industrial melanism in the Lepidoptera. Heredity, 9, 323–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kettlewell, H. B. D. 1956. Further selection experiments on industrial melanism in the Lepidoptera. Heredity, 10, 287–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingsland, S. 1978. Abbott Thayer and the protective coloration debate. Journal of the History of Biology, 11, 223–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindell, L. E. & Forsman, A. 1996. Sexual dichromatism in snakes: support for the flicker-fusion hypothesis. Behavioral Ecology, 74, 2254–2256.Google Scholar
Lubbock, J. 1882. Ants, Bees, and Wasps: A Record of Observations on the Habits of the Social Hymenoptera. London: Kegan Paul, Trench.Google Scholar
Majerus, M. E. N. 1998. Melanism: Evolution in Action. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Merilaita, S. 1998. Crypsis through disruptive coloration in an isopod. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 265, 1059–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merilaita, S. & Lind, J. 2005. Background-matching and disruptive coloration, and the evolution of cryptic coloration. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 272, 665–670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Merilaita, S., Tuomi, J. & Jormalainen, V. 1999. Optimization of cryptic coloration in heterogeneous habitats. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 67, 151–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merilaita, S., Lyytinen, A. & Mappes, J. 2001. Selection for cryptic coloration in a visually heterogeneous habitat. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 268, 1925–1929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nemerov, A. 1997. Vanishing Americans: Abbott Thayer, Theodore Roosevelt, and the attraction of camouflage. American Art, 11, 50–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, K. S. & Lowe, C. H. 1964. An analysis of background color-matching in amphibians and reptiles. Ecology, 45, 565–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pietrewicz, A. T. & Kamil, A. C. 1977. Visual detection by cryptic prey by blue jays (Cyanocitta cristata). Science, 195, 580–582.CrossRef
Pough, F. H. 1976. Multiple cryptic effects of crossbanded and ringed patterns of snakes. Copeia, 1976, 834–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poulton, E. B. 1890. The Colours of Animals: Their Meaning and Use. Especially Considered in the Case of Insects, 2nd edn. London: Kegan Paul, Trench Trübner, & Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pycraft, W. P. 1925. Camouflage in Nature. London: Hutchinson & Co.Google Scholar
Roosevelt, T. 1911. Revealing and Concealing Coloration in Birds and Mammals.
Rowland, H. M. 2009. From Abbot Thayer to the present day: what have we learned about the function of countershading? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 364, 519–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowland, H. M., Speed, M. P., Ruxton, G. D.et al. 2007. Countershading enhances cryptic protection: an experiment with wild birds and artificial prey. Animal Behaviour, 74, 1249–1258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowland, H. M., Cuthill, I. C., Harvey, I. F., Speed, M. P. & Ruxton, G. D. 2008. Can't tell the caterpillars from the trees: countershading enhances survival in a woodland. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 275, 2539–2546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruxton, G. D., Sherratt, T. N. & Speed, M. P. 2004. Avoiding Attack. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sazima, I., Carvalho, L. N., Mendonça, F. P. & Zuanon, J. 2006. Fallen leaves on the water-bed: diurnal camouflage of three night active fish species in an Amazonian streamlet. Neotropical Ichthyology, 4, 119–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaefer, M. H. & Stobbe, N. 2006. Disruptive coloration provides camouflage independent of background matching. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 273, 2427–2432.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sherratt, T. N., Pollitt, D. & Wilkinson, D. M. 2007. The evolution of crypsis in replicating populations of web-based prey. Oikos, 116, 449–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shine, R. & Madsen, T. 1994. Sexual dichromatism in snakes of the genus Viperia: a review and a new evolutionary hypothesis. Journal of Herpetology, 28, 114–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siddiqi, A., Cronin, T. W., Loew, E. R., Vorobyev, M. & Summers, K. 2004. Interspecific and intraspecific views of color signals in the strawberry poison frog Dendrobates pumilio. Journal of Experimental Biology, 207, 2471–2485.CrossRef
Skelhorn, J. & Ruxton, G. D. 2010. Predators are less likely to misclassify masquerading prey when their models are present. Biology Letters, 6, 597–599.
Skelhorn, J., Rowland, H. M. & Ruxton, G. D. 2010a. Masquerade: camouflage without crypsis. Science, 327, 51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skelhorn, J., Rowland, H. M. & Ruxton, G. D. 2010b. The evolution and ecology of masquerade. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 99, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Speed, M. P., Kelly, D. J., Davidson, A. M. & Ruxton, G. D. 2004. Countershading enhances crypsis with some bird species but not others. Behavioral Ecology, 16, 327–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, M. 2007. Predator perception and the interrelation between protective coloration. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 274, 1457–1464.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, M. & Cuthill, I. C. 2006. Disruptive coloration, crypsis and edge detection in early visual processing. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 273, 2141–2147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, M. & Merilaita, S. 2009a. Animal camouflage: current issues and new perspectives. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 364, 423–427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, M. & Merilaita, S. 2009b. Defining disruptive coloration and distinguishing its functions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 364, 481–488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, M., Cuthill, I. C., Párraga, C. A. & Troscianko, T. 2006a. The effectiveness of disruptive coloration as a concealment strategy. In Progress in Brain Research, vol. 155, eds. Alonso, J.-M., Macknik, S., Martinez, L., Tse, P. & Martinez-Conde, S.Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 49–65.Google Scholar
Stevens, M., Cuthill, I. C., Windsor, A. M. M. & Walker, H. J. 2006b. Disruptive contrast in animal camouflage. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 273, 2433–2438.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, M., Graham, J., Winney, I. S. & Cantor, A. 2008a. Testing Thayer's hypothesis: can camouflage work by distraction? Biology Letters, 4, 648–650.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, M., Yule, D. H. & Ruxton, G. D. 2008b. Dazzle coloration and prey movement. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 275, 2639–2643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, M., Winney, I. S., Cantor, A. & Graham, J. 2009. Object outline and surface disruption in animal camouflage. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 276, 781–786.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stoner, C. J., Caro, T. M. & Graham, C. M. 2003. Ecological and behavioral correlates of coloration in artiodactyls: systematic analyses of conventional hypotheses. Behavioral Ecology, 14, 823–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuart-Fox, D., Moussalli, A. & Whiting, M. J. 2008. Predator-specific camouflage in chameleons. Biology Letters, 4, 326–329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tankus, A. & Yeshurun, Y. 2009. Computer vision, camouflage breaking and countershading. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 364, 529–536.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thayer, A. H. 1896. The law which underlies protective coloration. The Auk, 13, 477–482.Google Scholar
Thayer, G. H. 1909. Concealing-Coloration in the Animal Kingdom: An Exposition of the Laws of Disguise through Color and Pattern: Being a Summary of Abbott H. Thayer's Discoveries. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Tinbergen, N. 1974. Curious Naturalists, revised edn. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Education.Google Scholar
Troscianko, T., Benton, C. P., Lovell, G. P., Tolhurst, D. J. & Pizlo, Z. 2009. Camouflage and visual perception. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 364, 449–461.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallace, A. R. 1889. Darwinism: An Exposition of the Theory of Natural Selection with Some of its Applications. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Wallace, A. R. 1891. Natural Selection and Tropical Nature: Essays on Descriptive and Theoretical Biology. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, R. J., Callahan, A., Godin, J.-G. J. & Sherratt, T. N. 2009. Behaviourally mediated crypsis in two nocturnal moths with contrasting appearance. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 364, 503–510.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yanes, Y., Martín, J., Delgado, J. D., Alonso, M. R. & Ibáñez, M. 2010. Active disguise in land snails: Napaeus badiosus (Gastropoda, Pulmonata) from the Canary Islands. Journal of Conchology, 40, 143–148.Google Scholar
Zylinski, S., Osorio, D. & Shohet, A. J. 2009. Perception of edges and visual texture in the camouflage of the common cuttlefish, Sepia officinalis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 364, 439–448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zylinski, S., Osorio, D. & Shohet, A. J. 2010. Cuttlefish camouflage: context-dependent body pattern use during motion. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 276, 3963–3969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×