The use of background matching vs. masquerade for camouflage in cuttlefish Sepia officinalis
Authors:
- Kendra C. BureschKBKendra C. Buresch
- Lydia M. MäthgerLMLydia M. Mäthger
- Justine J. AllenJAJustine J. Allen
- Chelsea BenniceCBChelsea Bennice
- Neal SmithNSNeal Smith
- Jonathan SchramJSJonathan Schram
- Chuan-Chin ChiaoCCChuan-Chin Chiao
- Charles ChubbCCCharles Chubb
- Roger T. HanlonRHRoger T. Hanlon
- 1 December 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Elsevier in Vision Research
- Vol. 51 (23-24) , 2362-2368
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- Density-dependent predation influences the evolution and behavior of masquerading preyProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2011
- Context-dependent misclassification of masquerading preyEvolutionary Ecology, 2010
- Predators are less likely to misclassify masquerading prey when their models are presentBiology Letters, 2010
- Masquerade: Camouflage Without CrypsisScience, 2010
- The evolution and ecology of masqueradeBiological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2009
- Cuttlefish dynamic camouflage: responses to substrate choice and integration of multiple visual cuesProceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 2009
- Cephalopod dynamic camouflage: bridging the continuum between background matching and disruptive colorationPhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2008
- Animal camouflage: current issues and new perspectivesPhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2008
- Perception of visual texture and the expression of disruptive camouflage by the cuttlefish,Sepia officinalisProceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 2007
- Symmetrical crypsis and asymmetrical signalling in the cuttlefishSepia officinalisProceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 2005