The natural resting orientations of several species of nocturnal moth on tree trunks were recorded over a three-month period in eastern Ontario, Canada. Moths from certain genera exhibited resting orientation distributions that differed significantly from random, whereas others did not. In particular, Catocala spp. collectively tended to orient vertically, whereas subfamily Larentiinae representatives showed a variety of orientations that did not differ significantly from random. To understand why different moth species adopted different orientations, we presented human subjects with a computer-based detection task of finding and 'attacking' Catocala cerogama and Euphyia intermediata target images at different orientations when superimposed on images of sugar maple (Acer saccharum) trees. For both C. cerogama and E. intermediata, orientation had a significant effect on survivorship, although the effect was more pronounced in C. cerogama. When the tree background images were flipped horizontally the optimal orientation changed accordingly, indicating that the detection rates were dependent on the interaction between certain directional appearance features of the moth and its background. Collectively, our results suggest that the contrasting wing patterns of the moths are involved in background matching, and that the moths are able to improve their crypsis through appropriate behavioural orientation.
Notes
Cites: Evolution. 2003 Jun;57(6):1248-5412894933
Cites: Nature. 2005 Mar 3;434(7029):72-415744301
Cites: Proc Biol Sci. 2005 Mar 22;272(1563):665-7015817442
Cites: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Feb 28;103(9):3214-916481615
Cites: Proc Biol Sci. 2006 Oct 7;273(1600):2433-816959632
Cites: Proc Biol Sci. 2007 May 22;274(1615):1325-3117360282
Cites: Nature. 2002 Feb 7;415(6872):609-1311832937
Cites: Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Jun 22;274(1617):1457-6417426012
Cites: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2009 Feb 27;364(1516):489-9618990668
Cites: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2009 Feb 27;364(1516):481-818990673
Cites: Am Nat. 2007 Jan;169 Suppl 1:S7-2619426092
Cites: Proc Biol Sci. 2006 Oct 7;273(1600):2427-3216959631
Cites: Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Jun 7;274(1616):1369-7517389219