Matching Items (1)
Description
Warning coloration deters predators from attacking prey that are defended, usually by being distasteful, toxic, or otherwise costly for predators to pursue and consume. Predators may have an innate response to warning colors or learn to associate them with a defense through trial and error. In general, predators should select for warning signals that are easy to learn and recognize. Previous research demonstrates long-wavelength colors (e.g. red and yellow) are effective because they are readily detected and learned. However, a number of defended animals display short-wavelength coloration (e.g. blue and violet), such as the pipevine swallowtail butterfly (Battus philenor). The role of blue coloration in warning signals had not previously been explicitly tested. My research showed in laboratory experiments that curve-billed thrashers (Toxostoma curvirostre) and Gambel's quail (Callipepla gambelii) can learn and recognize the iridescent blue of B. philenor as a warning signal and that it is innately avoided. I tested the attack rates of these colors in the field and blue was not as effective as orange. I concluded that blue colors may function as warning signals, but the effectiveness is likely dependent on the context and predator.
Blue colors are often iridescent in nature and the effect of iridescence on warning signal function was unknown. I reared B. philenor larvae under varied food deprivation treatments. Iridescent colors did not have more variation than pigment-based colors under these conditions; variation which could affect predator learning. Learning could also be affected by changes in appearance, as iridescent colors change in both hue and brightness as the angle of illuminating light and viewer change in relation to the color surface. Iridescent colors can also be much brighter than pigment-based colors and iridescent animals can statically display different hues. I tested these potential effects on warning signal learning by domestic chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus) and found that variation due to the directionality of iridescence and a brighter warning signal did not influence learning. However, blue-violet was learned more readily than blue-green. These experiments revealed that the directionality of iridescent coloration does not likely negatively affect its potential effectiveness as a warning signal.
Blue colors are often iridescent in nature and the effect of iridescence on warning signal function was unknown. I reared B. philenor larvae under varied food deprivation treatments. Iridescent colors did not have more variation than pigment-based colors under these conditions; variation which could affect predator learning. Learning could also be affected by changes in appearance, as iridescent colors change in both hue and brightness as the angle of illuminating light and viewer change in relation to the color surface. Iridescent colors can also be much brighter than pigment-based colors and iridescent animals can statically display different hues. I tested these potential effects on warning signal learning by domestic chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus) and found that variation due to the directionality of iridescence and a brighter warning signal did not influence learning. However, blue-violet was learned more readily than blue-green. These experiments revealed that the directionality of iridescent coloration does not likely negatively affect its potential effectiveness as a warning signal.
ContributorsPegram, Kimberly Vann (Author) / Rutowski, Ronald L (Thesis advisor) / Hoelldobler, Berthold (Committee member) / Liebig, Juergen (Committee member) / McGraw, Kevin (Committee member) / Smith, Brian H. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015