Conspicuousness of Dickerson's collared lizard (Crotaphytus dickersonae) through the eyes of conspecifics and predators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selection should favour coloration in organisms that is more conspicuous to their own visual system than to those of their predators or prey. We tested this prediction in Dickerson's collared lizard (Crotaphytus dickersonae), a sexually dichromatic desert reptile that preys on insects and smaller lizard species, and which in turn is prey for birds and snakes. We modelled the spectral sensitivities of the lizards and their avian and snake predators, and compared the conspicuousness of the lizards' entire colour patterns with each class of viewers. Almost all comparisons involving females strongly supported our prediction for greater chromatic and brightness conspicuousness against local terrestrial visual backgrounds to their own modelled visual system than to those of avian and snake predators. Males, in contrast, exhibited far fewer cases of greater conspicuousness to their own visual system than to those of their predators. Our own perception of spectral similarity between blue C. dickersonae males and a local nonterrestrial visual background (i.e. the Sea of Cortéz) prompted a further investigation. We compared sea (and sky) radiance with dorsum radiance of C. dickersonae males and with males from two distantly-related Crotaphytus collaris populations in which males possess blue bodies. In all three visual models, C. dickersonae males exhibited significantly lower chromatic contrast with the sea (and sky) than did their noncoastal, blue-bodied congeners. Among potential explanations, the blue body coloration that is unique to male C. dickersonae may offset, if only slightly, the cost of visibility to predators (and to prey) through reduced contrast against the extensive, local, nonterrestrial blue backgrounds of the sea and sky.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".