Abstract
Animal colouration is often a trade-off between background matching for camouflage from predators, and conspicuousness for communication with con- or heterospecifics. Stomatopods are marine crustaceans known to use colour signals during courtship and contests, while their overall body colouration may provide camouflage. However, we have little understanding of how stomatopods perceive these signals in their environment or whether overall body coloration does provide camouflage from predators. Neogonodactylus oerstedii assess meral spot colour during contests, and meral spot colour varies depending on local habitat. By calculating quantum catch for N. oerstedii’s 12 photoreceptors associated with chromatic vision, we found that variation in meral spot total reflectance does not function to increase signal contrast in the local habitat. Neogonodactylus oerstedii also show between-habitat variation in dorsal body colouration. We used visual models to predict a trichromatic fish predator’s perception of these colour variations. Our results suggest that sandy and green stomatopods are camouflaged from a typical fish predator in rubble fields and seagrass beds, respectively. To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate signal contrast and camouflage in a stomatopod. These results provide new insight into the function and evolution of colouration in a species with a complex visual system.
Highlights
We examined whether habitat variation in meral spot colour (Fig. 1B) increases contrast with the respective habitat, as perceived by a stomatopod receiver
In rubble habitats, the meral spots of stomatopods collected from seagrass habitats contrast more with the background (Fig. 2C)
By modelling perception of stomatopod colour and pattern by a typical fish predator, we demonstrate that N. oerstedii colour variations likely provide camouflage in seagrass and rubble habitats
Summary
Rubble Pseudo-F1,23 = 36.8, p = 0.001 Pseudo-F1,10 = 5.70, p = 0.055* Pseudo-F1,18 = 3.40, p = 0.042 Pseudo-F1,27 = 12.5, p = 0.002 Pseudo-F1,38 = 97.6, p = 0.001 Pseudo-F1,32 = 156, p = 0.001 Pseudo-F1,21 = 85.1, p = 0.001. Sand Pseudo-F1,23 = 52.8, p = 0.001 Pseudo-F1,10 = 8.87, p = 0.031* Pseudo-F1,18 = 2.35, p = 0.098 Pseudo-F1,27 = 3.38, p = 0.03 Pseudo-F1,38 = 83.0, p = 0.001 Pseudo-F1,32 = 138, p = 0.001 Pseudo-F1,21 = 59.2, p = 0.001. In rubble habitats, they are darker and have less contrasting patterns than both sand and rubble pieces (Cohen’s d > 0.8; Table 2). Green stomatopods have similar pattern size as all background types (Cohen’s d < 0.8)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
