Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31138092›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2019

Optimizing colour for camouflage and visibility using deep learning: the effects of the environment and the observer's visual system.

J G Fennell, L Talas, R J Baddeley, I C Cuthill, N E Scott-Samuel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. A Review of Cervidae Visual Ecology.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Varying benefits of generalist and specialist camouflage in two versus four background environments.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

J G Fennell1 School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol , 12a Priory Road, Bristol BS8 1TU , UK.
L Talas1 School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol , 12a Priory Road, Bristol BS8 1TU , UK.
R J Baddeley1 School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol , 12a Priory Road, Bristol BS8 1TU , UK.
I C Cuthill2 School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol , Bristol Life Sciences Building, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ , UK.
N E Scott-Samuel1 School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol , 12a Priory Road, Bristol BS8 1TU , UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Avoiding detection can provide significant survival advantages for prey, predators, or the military; conversely, maximizing visibility would be useful for signalling. One simple determinant of detectability is an animal's colour relative to its environment. But identifying the optimal colour to minimize (or maximize) detectability in a given natural environment is complex, partly because of the nature of the perceptual space. Here for the first time, using image processing techniques to embed targets into realistic environments together with psychophysics to estimate detectability and deep neural networks to interpolate between sampled colours, we propose a method to identify the optimal colour that either minimizes or maximizes visibility. We apply our approach in two natural environments (temperate forest and semi-arid desert) and show how a comparatively small number of samples can be used to predict robustly the most and least effective colours for camouflage. To illustrate how our approach can be generalized to other non-human visual systems, we also identify the optimum colours for concealment and visibility when viewed by simulated red-green colour-blind dichromats, typical for non-human mammals. Contrasting the results from these visual systems sheds light on why some predators seem, at least to humans, to have colouring that would appear detrimental to ambush hunting. We found that for simulated dichromatic observers, colour strongly affected detection time for both environments. In contrast, trichromatic observers were more effective at breaking camouflage.

Indexed as

Deep LearningModels, BiologicalAnimalsBiological MimicryHumansPigmentationVisual Perceptioncamouflageconspicuitydeep learningdichromacytrichromacyvisual perception

Identifiers

PMID31138092
PMCPMC6544896

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.