English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Animals possess a range of defensive markings to reduce the risk of predation, including warning colours, camouflage, eyespots and mimicry. These different strategies are frequently considered independently, and with little regard towards predator vision, even though they may be linked in various ways and can be fully understood only in terms of predator perception. For example, camouflage and warning coloration need not be mutually exclusive, and may frequently exploit similar features of visual perception. This paper outlines how different forms of protective markings can be understood from predator perception and illustrates how this is fundamental in determining the mechanisms underlying, and the interrelation between, different strategies. Suggestions are made for future work, and potential mechanisms discussed in relation to various forms of defensive coloration, including disruptive coloration, eyespots, dazzle markings, motion camouflage, aposematism and mimicry.

Predator perception and the interrelation between different forms of protective coloration