Search for: All records

Examining the role of color in mate choice without testing what colors the study animal is capable of seeing can lead to ill-posed hypotheses and erroneous conclusions. Here, we test the seemingly reasonable assumption that the sexually dimorphic red coloration of the male jumping spiderSaitis barbipesis distinguishable, by females, from adjacent black color patches. Using microspectrophotometry, we find clear evidence for photoreceptor classes with maximal sensitivity in the UV (359 nm) and green (526 nm), inconclusive evidence for a photoreceptor maximally sensitive in the blue (451 nm), and no evidence for a red photoreceptor. No colored filters within the lens or retina could be found to shift green sensitivity to red. To quantify and visualize whether females may nevertheless be capable of discriminating red from black color patches, we take multispectral images of males and calculate photoreceptor excitations and color contrasts between color patches. Red patches would be, at best, barely discriminable from black, and not discriminable from a low-luminance green. Some color patches that appear achromatic to human eyes, such as beige and white, strongly absorb UV wavelengths and would appear as brighter “spider-greens” toS. barbipesthan the red color patches. Unexpectedly, we discover an iridescent UV patch that contrasts strongly with the UV-absorbing surfaces dominating the rest of the spider. We propose that red and black coloration may serve identical purposes in sexual signaling, functioning to generate strong achromatic contrast with the visual background. The potential functional significance of red coloration outside of sexual signaling is discussed.

 

Synopsis Investigating how animals navigate space and time is key to understanding communication. Small differences in spatial positioning or timing can mean the difference between a message received and a missed connection. However, these spatio-temporal dynamics are often overlooked or are subject to simplifying assumptions in investigations of animal signaling. This special issue addresses this significant knowledge gap by integrating work from researchers with disciplinary backgrounds in neuroscience, cognitive ecology, sensory ecology, computer science, evolutionary biology, animal behavior, and philosophy. This introduction to the special issue outlines the novel questions and approaches that will advance our understanding of spatio-temporal dynamics of animal communication. We highlight papers that consider the evolution of spatio-temporal dynamics of behavior across sensory modalities and social contexts. We summarize contributions that address the neural and physiological mechanisms in senders and receivers that shape communication. We then turn to papers that introduce cutting edge technologies that will revolutionize our ability to track spatio-temporal dynamics of individuals during social encounters. The interdisciplinary collaborations that gave rise to these papers emerged in part from a novel workshop-symposium model, which we briefly summarize for those interested in fostering syntheses across disciplines. 

Synopsis Animal communication is inherently spatial. Both signal transmission and signal reception have spatial biases—involving direction, distance, and position—that interact to determine signaling efficacy. Signals, be they visual, acoustic, or chemical, are often highly directional. Likewise, receivers may only be able to detect signals if they arrive from certain directions. Alignment between these directional biases is therefore critical for effective communication, with even slight misalignments disrupting perception of signaled information. In addition, signals often degrade as they travel from signaler to receiver, and environmental conditions that impact transmission can vary over even small spatiotemporal scales. Thus, how animals position themselves during communication is likely to be under strong selection. Despite this, our knowledge regarding the spatial arrangements of signalers and receivers during communication remains surprisingly coarse for most systems. We know even less about how signaler and receiver behaviors contribute to effective signaling alignment over time, or how signals themselves may have evolved to influence and/or respond to these aspects of animal communication. Here, we first describe why researchers should adopt a more explicitly geometric view of animal signaling, including issues of location, direction, and distance. We then describe how environmental and social influences introduce further complexities to the geometry of signaling. We discuss how multimodality offers new challenges and opportunities for signalers and receivers. We conclude with recommendations and future directions made visible by attention to the geometry of signaling. 

Synopsis The term “cognitive template” originated from work in human-based cognitive science to describe a literal, stored, neural representation used in recognition tasks. As the study of cognition has expanded to nonhuman animals, the term has diffused to describe a wider range of animal cognitive tools and strategies that guide action through the recognition of and discrimination between external states. One potential reason for this nonstandardized meaning and variable employment is that researchers interested in the broad range of animal recognition tasks enjoy the simplicity of the cognitive template concept and have allowed it to become shorthand for many dissimilar or unknown neural processes without deep scrutiny of how this metaphor might comport with underlying neurophysiology. We review the functional evidence for cognitive templates in fields such as perception, navigation, communication, and learning, highlighting any neural correlates identified by these studies. We find that the concept of cognitive templates has facilitated valuable exploration at the interface between animal behavior and cognition, but the quest for a literal template has failed to attain mechanistic support at the level of neurophysiology. This may be the result of a misled search for a single physical locus for the “template” itself. We argue that recognition and discrimination processes are best treated as emergent and, as such, may not be physically localized within single structures of the brain. Rather, current evidence suggests that such tasks are accomplished through synergies between multiple distributed processes in animal nervous systems. We thus advocate for researchers to move toward a more ecological, process-oriented conception, especially when discussing the neural underpinnings of recognition-based cognitive tasks.