Optimizing countershading camouflage

Innes C. Cuthill, N. Simon Sanghera, Olivier Penacchio, P. George Lovell, Graeme D. Ruxton, Julie M. Harris

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)
11 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Countershading, the widespread tendency of animals to be darker on the side that receives strongest illumination, has classically been explained as an adaptation for camouflage: obliterating cues to 3D shape and enhancing background matching. However, there have only been two quantitative tests of whether the patterns observed in different species match the optimal shading to obliterate 3D cues, and no tests of whether optimal countershading actually improves concealment or survival. We use a mathematical model of the light field to predict the optimal countershading for concealment that is specific to the light environment and then test this prediction with correspondingly patterned model “caterpillars” exposed to avian predation in the field. We show that the optimal countershading is strongly illumination-dependent. A relatively sharp transition in surface patterning from dark to light is only optimal under direct solar illumination; if there is diffuse illumination from cloudy skies or shade, the pattern provides no advantage over homogeneous background-matching coloration. Conversely, a smoother gradation between dark and light is optimal under cloudy skies or shade. The demonstration of these illumination-dependent effects of different countershading patterns on predation risk strongly supports the comparative evidence showing that the type of countershading varies with light environment.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)13093–13097
Number of pages5
JournalProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Volume113
Issue number46
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Nov 2016

Fingerprint

camouflage
illumination
shades
cues
sky
animals
mathematical models
tendencies
color
predictions

Cite this

Cuthill, I. C., Sanghera, N. S., Penacchio, O., Lovell, P. G., Ruxton, G. D., & Harris, J. M. (2016). Optimizing countershading camouflage. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(46), 13093–13097. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611589113
Cuthill, Innes C. ; Sanghera, N. Simon ; Penacchio, Olivier ; Lovell, P. George ; Ruxton, Graeme D. ; Harris, Julie M. / Optimizing countershading camouflage. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2016 ; Vol. 113, No. 46. pp. 13093–13097.
@article{59ee3fd1f4b64c46aecce7428b6cfc3c,
title = "Optimizing countershading camouflage",
abstract = "Countershading, the widespread tendency of animals to be darker on the side that receives strongest illumination, has classically been explained as an adaptation for camouflage: obliterating cues to 3D shape and enhancing background matching. However, there have only been two quantitative tests of whether the patterns observed in different species match the optimal shading to obliterate 3D cues, and no tests of whether optimal countershading actually improves concealment or survival. We use a mathematical model of the light field to predict the optimal countershading for concealment that is specific to the light environment and then test this prediction with correspondingly patterned model “caterpillars” exposed to avian predation in the field. We show that the optimal countershading is strongly illumination-dependent. A relatively sharp transition in surface patterning from dark to light is only optimal under direct solar illumination; if there is diffuse illumination from cloudy skies or shade, the pattern provides no advantage over homogeneous background-matching coloration. Conversely, a smoother gradation between dark and light is optimal under cloudy skies or shade. The demonstration of these illumination-dependent effects of different countershading patterns on predation risk strongly supports the comparative evidence showing that the type of countershading varies with light environment.",
author = "Cuthill, {Innes C.} and Sanghera, {N. Simon} and Olivier Penacchio and Lovell, {P. George} and Ruxton, {Graeme D.} and Harris, {Julie M.}",
year = "2016",
month = "11",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1073/pnas.1611589113",
language = "English",
volume = "113",
pages = "13093–13097",
journal = "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America",
issn = "0027-8424",
number = "46",

}

Cuthill, IC, Sanghera, NS, Penacchio, O, Lovell, PG, Ruxton, GD & Harris, JM 2016, 'Optimizing countershading camouflage', Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 113, no. 46, pp. 13093–13097. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611589113

Optimizing countershading camouflage. / Cuthill, Innes C.; Sanghera, N. Simon; Penacchio, Olivier; Lovell, P. George; Ruxton, Graeme D.; Harris, Julie M.

In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 113, No. 46, 02.11.2016, p. 13093–13097.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Optimizing countershading camouflage

AU - Cuthill, Innes C.

AU - Sanghera, N. Simon

AU - Penacchio, Olivier

AU - Lovell, P. George

AU - Ruxton, Graeme D.

AU - Harris, Julie M.

PY - 2016/11/2

Y1 - 2016/11/2

N2 - Countershading, the widespread tendency of animals to be darker on the side that receives strongest illumination, has classically been explained as an adaptation for camouflage: obliterating cues to 3D shape and enhancing background matching. However, there have only been two quantitative tests of whether the patterns observed in different species match the optimal shading to obliterate 3D cues, and no tests of whether optimal countershading actually improves concealment or survival. We use a mathematical model of the light field to predict the optimal countershading for concealment that is specific to the light environment and then test this prediction with correspondingly patterned model “caterpillars” exposed to avian predation in the field. We show that the optimal countershading is strongly illumination-dependent. A relatively sharp transition in surface patterning from dark to light is only optimal under direct solar illumination; if there is diffuse illumination from cloudy skies or shade, the pattern provides no advantage over homogeneous background-matching coloration. Conversely, a smoother gradation between dark and light is optimal under cloudy skies or shade. The demonstration of these illumination-dependent effects of different countershading patterns on predation risk strongly supports the comparative evidence showing that the type of countershading varies with light environment.

AB - Countershading, the widespread tendency of animals to be darker on the side that receives strongest illumination, has classically been explained as an adaptation for camouflage: obliterating cues to 3D shape and enhancing background matching. However, there have only been two quantitative tests of whether the patterns observed in different species match the optimal shading to obliterate 3D cues, and no tests of whether optimal countershading actually improves concealment or survival. We use a mathematical model of the light field to predict the optimal countershading for concealment that is specific to the light environment and then test this prediction with correspondingly patterned model “caterpillars” exposed to avian predation in the field. We show that the optimal countershading is strongly illumination-dependent. A relatively sharp transition in surface patterning from dark to light is only optimal under direct solar illumination; if there is diffuse illumination from cloudy skies or shade, the pattern provides no advantage over homogeneous background-matching coloration. Conversely, a smoother gradation between dark and light is optimal under cloudy skies or shade. The demonstration of these illumination-dependent effects of different countershading patterns on predation risk strongly supports the comparative evidence showing that the type of countershading varies with light environment.

U2 - 10.1073/pnas.1611589113

DO - 10.1073/pnas.1611589113

M3 - Article

VL - 113

SP - 13093

EP - 13097

JO - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

JF - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

SN - 0027-8424

IS - 46

ER -

Cuthill IC, Sanghera NS, Penacchio O, Lovell PG, Ruxton GD, Harris JM. Optimizing countershading camouflage. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2016 Nov 2;113(46):13093–13097. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611589113