Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36129907›Full record

ArticleJournal of evolutionary biology2022

The evolution of conspicuousness in frogs: When to signal toxicity?

Sophie May Roberts, Devi Stuart-Fox, Iliana Medina

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of evolutionary biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Sophie May RobertsSchool of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Devi Stuart-FoxSchool of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Iliana MedinaSchool of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1021-5035

Funding

Australian Research Council DE200100500Australian Research Council FT180100216
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many organisms use conspicuous colour patterns to advertise their toxicity or unpalatability, a strategy known as aposematism. Despite the recognized benefits of this anti-predator tactic, not all chemically defended species exhibit warning coloration. Here, we use a comparative approach to investigate which factors predict the evolution of conspicuousness in frogs, a group in which conspicuous coloration and toxicity have evolved multiple times. We extracted colour information from dorsal and ventral photos of 594 frog species for which chemical defence information was available. Our results show that chemically defended and diurnal species have higher internal chromatic contrast, both ventrally and dorsally, than chemically undefended and/or nocturnal species. Among species that are chemically defended, conspicuous coloration is more likely to occur if species are diurnal. Our results also suggest that the evolution of conspicuous colour is more likely to occur in chemically defended prey with smaller body size. We discuss potential explanations for this association and suggest that prey profitability (related to body size) could be an important force driving the macroevolution of warning signals.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionBiological MimicryAnimalsAnuraaposematismdefensesfrogsmacroevolutionwarning signals

Identifiers

PMID36129907
PMCPMC9825868

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.