Communication in the Ultraviolet

Silberglied, Robert E.

doi:10.1146/annurev.es.10.110179.002105

Cited by 181 publications

(121 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

108

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1). Our results confirm previous studies indicating the importance of ultraviolet ornamentation as a preferred trait in sexual communication (e.g., insects, 25,26 birds, 27 guppies, 28,29 and swordtails 24 ). What is unique to our study is that we show that UV ornamentation is a preferred trait among males belonging to two different genotypic-morphs (intermediate and large class males).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…9,10 Behavioral traits between these two classes differ, however. Large males (Ͼ31 mm SL) exhibiting almost no 'chasing' behavior and rely on stereotyped courtship to attract females, while intermediate males (26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31) mm SL) exhibit a combination of both chasing and courtship. 9 Here we explore whether multicomponent signaling features (UV and male activity) have differential effects by size class.…”

Section: Introduction Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is UV Ornamentation an Amplifier in Swordtails?

Cummings

León²,

Mollaghan³

et al. 2006

Zebrafish

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Introduction Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is UV Ornamentation an Amplifier in Swordtails?

Cummings

León²,

Mollaghan³

et al. 2006

Zebrafish

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Butterflies offer spectacular examples of sexual dimorphism associated with wing color variation between males and females (sexual dichromatism). The use of wing color cues in speciation (Silberglied, 1979) and sexual selection (Obara, 1970) has long been recognized. Sympatric butterfly relatives that look similar from the human perspective are readily distinguished, for instance, by UVbased signals (Silberglied, 1979).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of wing color cues in speciation (Silberglied, 1979) and sexual selection (Obara, 1970) has long been recognized. Sympatric butterfly relatives that look similar from the human perspective are readily distinguished, for instance, by UVbased signals (Silberglied, 1979). Moreover, females have been shown to use species-specific UV reflectance patterns to identify mates (Silberglied and Taylor, 1973;Rutowski, 1977;Robertson and Monteiro, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beauty in the eye of the beholder: the two blue opsins of lycaenid butterflies and the opsin gene-driven evolution of sexually dimorphic eyes

Sison-Mangus

Bernard

Lampel

et al. 2006

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Although previous investigations have shown that wing coloration is an important component of social signaling in butterflies, the contribution of opsin evolution to sexual wing color dichromatism and interspecific divergence remains largely unexplored. Here we report that the butterfly Lycaena rubidus has evolved sexually dimorphic eyes due to changes in the regulation of opsin expression patterns to match the contrasting life histories of males and females. The L. rubidus eye contains four visual pigments with peak sensitivities in the ultraviolet (UV;λ max=360 nm), blue (B; λmax=437 nm and 500 nm, respectively) and long (LW; λmax=568 nm) wavelength range. By combining in situ hybridization of cloned opsinencoding cDNAs with epi-microspectrophotometry, we found that all four opsin mRNAs and visual pigments are expressed in the eyes in a sex-specific manner. The male dorsal eye, which contains only UV and B (λmax=437 nm)visual pigments, indeed expresses two short wavelength opsin mRNAs, UVRh and BRh1. The female dorsal eye, which also has the UV and B (λmax=437 nm) visual pigments, also contains the LW visual pigment, and likewise expresses UVRh, BRh1 and LWRh mRNAs. Unexpectedly, in the female dorsal eye, we also found BRh1 co-expressed with LWRh in the R3-8 photoreceptor cells. The ventral eye of both sexes, on the other hand, contains all four visual pigments and expresses all four opsin mRNAs in a non-overlapping fashion. Surprisingly, we found that the 500 nm visual pigment is encoded by a duplicate blue opsin gene, BRh2. Further, using molecular phylogenetic methods we trace this novel blue opsin gene to a duplication event at the base of the Polyommatine+Thecline+Lycaenine radiation. The blue opsin gene duplication may help explain the blueness of blue lycaenid butterflies.

show abstract

“…This hypothesis is highly plausible for three reasons. First, some of the invertebrates, fruits, seeds and £owers on which birds feed re£ect in the UV (Burkhardt 1982;Silberglied 1979;Willson & Whelan 1989). Second, as UV sensitivity appears to be common among birds and is used in mate choice, sexual selection theories involving sensory drive (Endler 1992(Endler , 1993a, sensory exploitation (Ryan 1990) or other aspects of receiver psychology (Guilford & Dawkins 1991) would predict that UV signalling has been`co-opted' from an ancestral function such as foraging.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultraviolet cues affect the foraging behaviour of blue tits

Church

Bennett

Cuthill

et al. 1998

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The function of avian ultraviolet (UV) vision is only just beginning to be understood. One plausible hypothesis is that UV vision enhances the foraging ability of birds. To test this, we carried out behavioural experiments using wild-caught blue tits foraging for cabbage moth and winter moth caterpillars on natural and arti¢cial backgrounds. The light environment in our experiments was manipulated using either UVblocking or UV-transmitting ¢lters. We found that the blue tits tended to ¢nd the ¢rst prey item (out of four) more quickly when UV cues were present. This suggests that UV vision o¡ers bene¢ts to birds when searching for cryptic prey, despite the prey and backgrounds re£ecting relatively little UV. Although there was no direct e¡ect of UVon the time taken to ¢nd all four prey items in a trial, search performance in the absence of UV wavelengths tended to increase over the course of an experiment. This may re£ect changes in the search tactics of the birds. To our knowledge, these are the ¢rst data to suggest that birds use UVcues to detect cryptic insect prey, and have implications for our understanding of protective coloration.

show abstract

Communication in the Ultraviolet

Cited by 181 publications

References 0 publications

Is UV Ornamentation an Amplifier in Swordtails?

Is UV Ornamentation an Amplifier in Swordtails?

Beauty in the eye of the beholder: the two blue opsins of lycaenid butterflies and the opsin gene-driven evolution of sexually dimorphic eyes

Ultraviolet cues affect the foraging behaviour of blue tits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About