4.2 Article

The Red-Fluorescing Marine Fish Tripterygion delaisi can Perceive its Own Red Fluorescent Colour

期刊

ETHOLOGY
卷 121, 期 6, 页码 566-576

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/eth.12367

关键词

red fluorescence; marine fishes; visual ecology

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG [Mi 482/13-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many marine fishes show conspicuous red fluorescent body patterns. Recent work suggests that red fluorescence may be used as a visual colour cue in these species. Very few studies, however, have as yet been able to demonstrate that red fluorescent fish can actually perceive their own fluorescence. This is the first study to our knowledge in which a red fluorescent fish is trained to assess whether it can recognize red fluorescence. We used the triplefin Tripterygion delaisi, a species with conspicuous red fluorescent eye rings. Training and testing involved repeated binary choices between grey and red fluorescence cues. The training and testing were carried out under broad spectral illumination. The final testing phase involved cyan light illumination, mimicking natural ambient light at depth. When testing all nine combinations of three grey brightness levels against three red fluorescence brightness levels, individuals made significantly more correct choices than the random expectation under broad as well as cyan illumination. Under cyan illumination, fish trained on red chose the correct cue more often compared to fish trained on grey. An analysis of the effect of the brightness levels suggests that fish did indeed make their choices based on chromatic more than achromatic cues: The three grey levels did not affect the proportion of correct choices. We conclude that T.delaisi can perceive and respond to levels of fluorescence that are similar to its own. We also discuss the difficulties that can arise from using a binary choice design on a fish with a cryptobenthic lifestyle. We argue in favour of using sequential choice designs in future studies of T.delaisi.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据