Quantifying camouflage and conspicuousness using visual salience

1. Being able to quantify the conspicuousness of animal and plant colouration is key to understanding its evolutionary and adaptive significance. Camouflaged animals, for example, are under strong selection pressure to minimise their conspicuousness to potential predators. However, successful camouflage is not an intrinsic characteristic of an animal, but rather an interaction between that animal’s phenotype and the visual environment that it is viewed against. Moreover, the efficacy of any given camouflage strategy is determined not by the signaller’s phenotype per se, but by the perceptual and cognitive capabilities of potential predators. Any attempts to quantify camouflage must therefore take both predator perception and the visual background into account. 2. Here I describe the use of species-relevant saliency maps, which combine the different visual features that contribute to selective attention (in this case the luminance, colour and orientation contrasts of features in the visual environment) into a single holistic measure of target conspicuousness. These can be tuned to the specific perceptual capabilities of the receiver, and used to derive a quantitative measure of target conspicuousness. Furthermore, I provide experimental evidence that these computed measures of conspicuousness significantly predict the performance of both captive and wild birds when searching for camouflaged artificial prey. 3. By allowing the quantification of prey conspicuousness, saliency maps provide a useful tool for understanding the evolution of animal signals. However, this is not limited to inconspicuous visual signals, and the same approach could be readily used for quantifying conspicuous visual signals in a wide variety of contexts, including, for example, signals involved in mate choice and warning colouration.

[1]  Jérôme Casas,et al.  Visual systems: Predator and prey views of spider camouflage , 2002, Nature.

[2]  Nina Stobbe,et al.  Disruptive coloration provides camouflage independent of background matching , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[3]  M. Petrie,et al.  Experimental and natural changes in the peacock's (Pavo cristatus) train can affect mating success , 1994, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[4]  M. Stevens,et al.  Visual modeling shows that avian host parents use multiple visual cues in rejecting parasitic eggs , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[5]  M. Stevens,et al.  Camouflage predicts survival in ground-nesting birds , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[6]  N. Hart Vision in the peafowl (Aves: Pavo cristatus). , 2002, The Journal of experimental biology.

[7]  M. Huynen,et al.  Disruptive coloration and background pattern matching , 2005, Nature.

[8]  M. Stevens,et al.  Quantifying camouflage: how to predict detectability from appearance , 2017, BMC Evolutionary Biology.

[9]  C. Town,et al.  Pattern recognition algorithm reveals how birds evolve individual egg pattern signatures , 2014, Nature Communications.

[10]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[11]  S. Merilaita,et al.  Hide and seek: properties of prey and background patterns affect prey detection by blue tits , 2014 .

[12]  Alain F. Zuur,et al.  A protocol for data exploration to avoid common statistical problems , 2010 .

[13]  P. König,et al.  Beyond Correlation: Do Color Features Influence Attention in Rainforest? , 2011, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[14]  J. Endler,et al.  Modification of the visual background increases the conspicuousness of golden-collared manakin displays , 2004 .

[15]  Ali Borji,et al.  State-of-the-Art in Visual Attention Modeling , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[16]  M. Vorobyev,et al.  Photoreceptor sectral sensitivities in terrestrial animals: adaptations for luminance and colour vision , 2005, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[17]  Á. Miklósi,et al.  Visual Ecology and Perception of Coloration Patterns by Domestic Chicks , 1999, Evolutionary Ecology.

[18]  D. Olton,et al.  Neurobiology of Comparative Cognition , 1990 .

[19]  Sami Merilaita,et al.  VISUAL BACKGROUND COMPLEXITY FACILITATES THE EVOLUTION OF CAMOUFLAGE , 2003, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[20]  M. Vorobyev,et al.  Receptor noise as a determinant of colour thresholds , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[21]  Richard A. Peters Movement - based signalling and the physical world: modelling the changing perceptual task for receivers , 2010 .

[22]  S Ullman,et al.  Shifts in selective visual attention: towards the underlying neural circuitry. , 1985, Human neurobiology.

[23]  Fiora Pirri,et al.  Motion Saliency Maps from Spatiotemporal Filtering , 2009, WAPCV.

[24]  Jianjun Lei,et al.  Depth combined saliency detection based on region contrast model , 2012, 2012 7th International Conference on Computer Science & Education (ICCSE).

[25]  M. Vorobyev,et al.  A review of the evolution of animal colour vision and visual communication signals , 2008, Vision Research.

[26]  J. Rieger,et al.  Sensory and cognitive contributions of color to the recognition of natural scenes , 2000, Current Biology.

[27]  G. Ruxton,et al.  Egg-Laying Substrate Selection for Optimal Camouflage by Quail , 2013, Current Biology.

[28]  D. Hubel,et al.  Receptive fields of single neurones in the cat's striate cortex , 1959, The Journal of physiology.

[29]  Innes C Cuthill,et al.  Background complexity and the detectability of camouflaged targets by birds and humans , 2016, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[30]  Sankar K. Pal,et al.  Rough Fuzzy Image Analysis: Foundations and Methodologies , 2010 .

[31]  C. D. Jones,et al.  Discrimination of oriented visual textures by poultry chicks , 2004, Vision Research.

[32]  Hsueh-Ming Hang,et al.  Learning-based saliency model with depth information. , 2015, Journal of vision.

[33]  S. Merilaita Hide and seek: properties of prey and background patterns affect prey detection by , 2014 .

[34]  M. Petrie,et al.  Peahens prefer peacocks with elaborate trains , 1991, Animal Behaviour.

[35]  Ken Chen,et al.  Stereoscopic Visual Attention Model for 3D Video , 2010, MMM.

[36]  S. Merilaita,et al.  Animal camouflage: current issues and new perspectives , 2009, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[37]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model Selection and Multimodel Inference , 2003 .

[38]  Christof Koch,et al.  Modeling attention to salient proto-objects , 2006, Neural Networks.

[39]  Mark A. Georgeson,et al.  Edges and bars: where do people see features in 1-D images? , 2005, Vision Research.

[40]  Chris M Herdman,et al.  Disruptive camouflage impairs object recognition , 2013, Biology Letters.

[41]  R. Montgomerie,et al.  Peahens prefer peacocks displaying more eyespots, but rarely , 2011, Animal Behaviour.

[42]  J. Lythgoe,et al.  Zebra stripes and tiger stripes: the spatial frequency distribution of the pattern compared to that of the background is significant in display and crypsis , 1987 .

[43]  D. Hubel,et al.  Anatomy and physiology of a color system in the primate visual cortex , 1984, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[44]  C. Chubb,et al.  The scaling effects of substrate texture on camouflage patterning in cuttlefish , 2009, Vision Research.

[45]  C. Koch,et al.  Computational modelling of visual attention , 2001, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[46]  M. Vorobyev,et al.  Animal colour vision — behavioural tests and physiological concepts , 2003, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[47]  M. Théry,et al.  Iridescent structurally based coloration of eyespots correlates with mating success in the peacock , 2007 .

[48]  Christof Koch,et al.  A Model of Saliency-Based Visual Attention for Rapid Scene Analysis , 2009 .

[49]  J. Endler,et al.  Comparing entire colour patterns as birds see them , 2005 .

[50]  Yuanzhen Li,et al.  Feature congestion: a measure of display clutter , 2005, CHI.

[51]  I. Cuthill,et al.  Disruptive coloration, crypsis and edge detection in early visual processing , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[52]  J. Mollon "Tho' she kneel'd in that place where they grew..." The uses and origins of primate colour vision. , 1989, The Journal of experimental biology.

[53]  Jérôme Casas,et al.  Predator and prey views of spider camouflage Both hunter and hunted fail to notice crab-spiders blending with coloured petals , 2022 .

[54]  Laurent Itti,et al.  An Integrated Model of Top-Down and Bottom-Up Attention for Optimizing Detection Speed , 2006, 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'06).

[55]  M. Stevens,et al.  Camouflage through behavior in moths: the role of background matching and disruptive coloration , 2015 .