Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32396802›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2020

Countershading enhances camouflage by reducing prey contrast.

Callum G Donohue, Jan M Hemmi, Jennifer L Kelley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. High detectability costs select weak warning signals in chemically defended gregarious prey.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

3 authors.

Callum G DonohueSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia.
Jan M HemmiSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia.
Jennifer L KelleySchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A three-dimensional body shape is problematic for camouflage because overhead lighting produces a luminance gradient across the body's surface. Countershading, a form of patterning where animals are darkest on their uppermost surface, is thought to counteract this luminance gradient and enhance concealment, but the mechanisms of protection remain unclear. Surprisingly, no study has examined how countershading alters prey contrast, or investigated how the presence of a dorsoventral luminance gradient affects detection under controlled viewing conditions. It has also been suggested that the direction of the dorsoventral luminance gradient (darkest or lightest on top) may interfere with predators' abilities to resolve prey's three-dimensional shape, yet this intriguing idea has never been tested. We used live fish predators (western rainbowfish,

Indexed as

PigmentationPredatory BehaviorAnimalsBiological EvolutionFood Chainadaptive colorationcamouflagecrypsispredator–prey interactionsvisual detection

Identifiers

PMID32396802
PMCPMC7287359

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.