ArticleBiology letters2023
Camouflage using three-dimensional surface disruption.
Article in Biology letters, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Visual contrast from background features and dynamic illumination contributes to three-dimensional camouflage in cuttlefish.The Journal of experimental biology · 2025Article
- Camouflage Using Surface Disruption: The Importance of Corners Versus Edges.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Reconstructing illusory camouflage patterns on moth wings using computer vision.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025Article
- Role of body size and shape in animal camouflage.Ecology and evolution · 2024Review
- Camouflage using three-dimensional surface disruption.Biology letters · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Disruptive markings are common in animal patterns and can provide camouflage benefits by concealing the body's true edges and/or by breaking the surface of the body into multiple depth planes. Disruptive patterns that are accentuated by high contrast borders are most likely to provide false depth cues to enhance camouflage, but studies to date have used visual detection models or humans as predators. We presented three-dimensional-printed moth-like targets to wild bird predators to determine whether: (1) three-dimensional prey with disrupted body surfaces have higher survival than three-dimensional prey with continuous surfaces, (2) two-dimensional prey with disruptive patterns or enhanced edge markings have higher survival than non-patterned two-dimensional prey. We found a survival benefit for three-dimensional prey with disrupted surfaces, and a significant effect of mean wing luminance. There was no evidence that false depth cues provided the same protective benefits as physical surface disruption in three-dimensional prey, perhaps because our treatments did not mimic the complexity of patterns found in natural animal markings. Our findings indicate that disruption of surface continuity is an important strategy for concealing a three-dimensional body shape.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.