Camouflage and selective predation in caterpillars of the poplar and eyed hawkmoths (Laothoe populi and Smerinthus ocellata)

Edmunds, Malcolm; Grayson, Joy

doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.1991.tb00575.x

Cited by 22 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies now provide evidence that avian predators exert a selection pressure in both natural (Edmunds & Grayson 1991) and artificial (Rowland et al 2007) systems, which can drive the maintenance of a countershaded colour pattern. This review raises important unanswered questions, and I conclude that further research on countershading is important for the understanding of the evolution of cryptic colour patterns and the psychophysical properties of prey and their associated predators.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Abbott Thayer to the present day: what have we learned about the function of countershading?

Rowland

2008

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Of the many visual characteristics of animals, countershading (darker pigmentation on those surfaces exposed to the most lighting) is one of the most common, and paradoxically one of the least well understood. Countershading has been hypothesized to reduce the detectability of prey to visually hunting predators, and while the function of a countershaded colour pattern was proposed over 100 years ago, the field has progressed slowly; convincing evidence for the protective effects of countershading has only recently emerged. Several mechanisms have been invoked for the concealing function of countershading and are discussed in this review, but the actual mechanisms by which countershading functions to reduce attacks by predators lack firm empirical testing. While there is some subjective evidence that countershaded animals match the background on which they rest, no quantitative measure of background matching has been published for countershaded animals; I now present the first such results. Most studies also fail to consider plausible alternative explanations for the colour pattern, such as protection from UV or abrasion, and thermoregulation. This paper examines the evidence to support each of these possible explanations for countershading and discusses the need for future empirical work.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Abbott Thayer to the present day: what have we learned about the function of countershading?

Rowland

2008

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(51) Experiments of selective predation of various color morphs of caterpillars, not related to industrial melanism, provided similar results. (52,53) The hypothesis that plant coloration undermines herbivorous insect camouflage Plants provide the habitat and food for many animals, and therefore it is logical to assume that visual perception of animals (both herbivores and predators) co-evolved with plants. In heterogeneous habitats, optimal camouflage coloration should maximize the degree of crypsis in the microhabitats used by the prey.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant coloration undermines herbivorous insect camouflage

Lev‐Yadun

Dafni

Flaishman³

et al. 2004

BioEssays

174

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main point of our hypothesis "coloration undermines camouflage" is that many color patterns in plants undermine the camouflage of invertebrate herbivores, especially insects, thus exposing them to predation and causing them to avoid plant organs with unsuitable coloration, to the benefit of the plants. This is a common case of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" and a visual parallel of the chemical signals that plants emit to call wasps when attacked by caterpillars. Moreover, this is also a common natural version of the well-known case of industrial melanism, which illustrates the great importance of plant-based camouflage for herbivorous insects and can serve as an independent test for our hypothesis. We claim that the enormous variations in coloration of leaves, petioles and stems as well as of flowers and fruits undermine the camouflage of invertebrate herbivores, especially insects. We assume that the same principle might operate in certain animal-parasite interactions. Our hypothesis, however, does not contrast or exclude other previous or future explanations of specific types of plant coloration. Traits such as coloration that have more than one type of benefit may be selected for by several agents and evolve more rapidly than ones with a single type of advantage.

show abstract

“…Morphological adaptations for concealment include crypsis through colour matching (e.g. Edmunds and Grayson, 1991;Canfield et al, 2009), counter-shading (e.g. Rowland et al, 2008) or camouflage (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Whistling in caterpillars (Amorpha juglandis, Bombycoidea): sound-producing mechanism and function

Bura

Rohwer

Martin

et al. 2011

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Caterpillar defenses have been researched extensively, and, although most studies focus on visually communicated signals, little is known about the role that sounds play in defense. We report on whistling, a novel form of sound production for caterpillars and rare for insects in general. The North American walnut sphinx (Amorpha juglandis) produces whistle ‘trains’ ranging from 44 to 2060 ms in duration and comprising one to eight whistles. Sounds were categorized into three types: broadband, pure whistles and multi-harmonic plus broadband, with mean dominant frequencies at 15 kHz, 9 kHz and 22 kHz, respectively. The mechanism of sound production was determined by selectively obstructing abdominal spiracles, monitoring air flow at different spiracles using a laser vibrometer and recording body movements associated with sound production using high-speed video. Contractions of the anterior body segments always accompanied sound production, forcing air through a pair of enlarged spiracles on the eighth abdominal segment. We tested the hypothesis that sounds function in defense using simulated attacks with blunt forceps and natural attacks with an avian predator – the yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia). In simulated attacks, 94% of caterpillars responded with whistle trains that were frequently accompanied by directed thrashing but no obvious chemical defense. In predator trials, all birds readily attacked the caterpillar, eliciting whistle trains each time. Birds responded to whistling by hesitating, jumping back or diving away from the sound source. We conclude that caterpillar whistles are defensive and propose that they function specifically as acoustic ‘eye spots’ to startle predators.

show abstract

Camouflage and selective predation in caterpillars of the poplar and eyed hawkmoths (Laothoe populi and Smerinthus ocellata)

Cited by 22 publications

References 14 publications

From Abbott Thayer to the present day: what have we learned about the function of countershading?

From Abbott Thayer to the present day: what have we learned about the function of countershading?

Plant coloration undermines herbivorous insect camouflage

Whistling in caterpillars (Amorpha juglandis, Bombycoidea): sound-producing mechanism and function

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About