Global selection on insect antipredator coloration

Open Access
Authors
  • Iliana Medina
  • Alice Exnerová
  • Klára Daňková
  • Olivier Penacchio
  • Tom N. Sherratt
  • Tomáš Albrecht
  • Sarika Baidya
  • Renan Janke Bosque
  • Héloïse Brown
  • Emily Burdfield-Steel ORCID logo
  • Kristal E. Cain
  • Rodrigo Roucourt Cezário
  • Ylenia Chiari
  • Carolina Esquivel
  • Rhainer Guillermo Ferreira
  • Amanda M. Franklin
  • Aloise Garvey
  • Samuel Guchu
  • Brandon T. Hastings
  • Kateřina Hotová-Svádová
  • Yerin Hwang
  • Changku Kang
  • John Kasaya
  • Jennifer Kelley
  • Yongsu Kim
  • Krushnamegh Kunte
  • Felipe Daetto-Liberato
  • Karl Loeffler-Henry
  • Vinicius Marques Lopez
  • Claire MacKay-Dietrich
  • Johanna Mappes
  • María Cecilia De Mársico
  • Viraj Nawge
  • Peter Njoroge
  • Ossi Nokelainen
  • Arka Pal
  • Archan Paul
  • Robert Posont
  • Jan Raška
  • Juan Carlos Reboreda
  • Juan Manuel Rojas Ripari
  • Hannah M. Rowland
  • Maria de las Nieves Sabio
  • Camilo Salazar
  • Fabian C. Salgado-Roa
  • Steve A. Stephens-Cárdenas
  • Anita Szabó
  • Juan Pablo Mongui Torres
  • Jolyon Troscianko
  • Marie Truhlářová
  • Kate D.L. Umbers
  • Molly Venton
  • Makenzie Vitasovich
  • Lu-Yi Wang
  • Sarah-Sophie Weil
  • William L. Allen
Publication date 25-09-2025
Journal Science
Volume | Issue number 389 | 6767
Pages (from-to) 1336-1341
Number of pages 6
Organisations
  • Faculty of Science (FNWI) - Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics (IBED)
Abstract

Natural selection has repeatedly led to the evolution of two alternative antipredator color strategies-camouflage to avoid detection and aposematism to advertise unprofitability-but we lack understanding of how ecological context favors one strategy over the other. We conducted a globally replicated predation experiment at 21 sites on six continents to test how predator community, prey community, and visual environment influenced the predation risk of 15,018 artificial paper "moth" prey with cryptic or warning coloration. Results indicated that aposematic strategies fare better in environments with low predation intensity, whereas camouflage strategies are advantaged when other camouflaged prey species are rare and when light levels are low. This study demonstrates how multiple mechanisms shape antipredator strategies, helping to explain the evolution and global distribution of camouflaged and aposematic animals.

Document type Article
Note With supplementary materials
Language English
Published at https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adr7368
Downloads
science.adr7368(1) (Final published version)
Supplementary materials
Permalink to this page
Back