DOCSLIB.ORG

Program for the AVA AGM, 24 April 2015 School of Psychology, University of Nottingham

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Program for the AVA AGM, 24 April 2015 School of Psychology, University of Nottingham Program for the AVA AGM, 24 April 2015 School of Psychology, University of Nottingham 10.00 Coffee and Registration, Foyer 10.55 Welcome. A1 Lecture Theatre 11.00 Invited Talk: Mark Georgeson, Aston University Early spatial vision: a view through two eyes 11.45 Daniel Baker. Surround suppression within and between the eyes does not increase with speed 12.00 Elisa Zamboni, Timothy Ledgeway, Paul McGraw and Denis Schluppeck. Non-informative cues bias reports of visual motion direction 12.15 Fleur Corbett, Janette Atkinson and Oliver Braddick. Feedforward and feedback processing of global visual motion and form: Evidence from EEG 12.30 Lunch & Posters. Social Space and Foyer 1.30 AGM Business meeting A1. All members welcome. 1.45 Special session: Vision and Camouflage Chair: Tim Meese Invited Talk: Innes Cuthill, University of Bristol Matching the background: deceptively simple? 2.30 Jolyon Troscianko, Martin Stevens and John Skelhorn. Does Disruptive Camouflage Disrupt Search Image Formation? 2.45 Olivier Penacchio, P George Lovell, Simon Sanghera, Innes Cuthill, Graeme Ruxton and Julie Harris. Countershading camouflage and the efficiency of visual search 3.00 Paul George Lovell, John Egan, Ken Scott-Brown and Rebecca J. Sharman. Exploring the role of enhanced-edges in disruptive camouflage 3.15 Coffee & Posters 3.45 Geoffrey Burton Memorial Lecture, sponsored by CRS Jan Atkinson Visual Development Unit, London and Oxford The Developing Visual Brain – from Newborns to Numeracy 4.30 Richard Johnston, Timothy Ledgeway, Nicola Pitchford and Neil Roach. Visual processing of motion and form by relatively good and poor adult readers 4.45 Benjamin Vincent. Bayesian models of perception: key concepts 5.00 Reception & Posters Posters 1. Greta Vilidaite and Daniel Baker. What is the best way to measure internal noise in the visual system? 2. Louise O'Hare and Simon Durrant. Resting alpha - state or trait? 3. Darren Cunningham and Jonathan Peirce. Early Visual Evoked Potential Responses to Coherent and Incoherent Plaid Stimuli 4. Alexis Makin, Giulia Rampone, Damien Wright, Letizia Palumbo and Marco Bertamini. The Holographic weight of evidence model predicts the amplitude of the neural response to symmetry 5. Mike Long, Harriet Allen, Gary Burnett and Robert Hardy. Depth discrimination between Augmented Reality and Real-world Targets 6. Paul Hibbard, Rebecca Hornsey and Peter Scarfe. A local reference frame impairs ordinal depth judgements on smoothly curved surfaces 7. Keith Langley, Veronique Lefebvre and Joshua Solomon. Underlying Mechanisms of Repulsion, Assimilation and Enhancement in Direct Tilt After-effects: A Cascaded Bayesian View 8. Paul Tern, Anna Hughes and David Tolhurst. The effect of striped target patterning on speed perception 9. Nicholas Jones, Anna Hughes and David Tolhurst. Interactions between target and background patterning in speed perception 10. Abigail Webb, Paul Hibbard and Rick O'Gorman. Variation in female reproductive hormones does not affect contrast sensitivity. 11. Frouke Hermens and Robin Walker. Comparing social and symbolic cues for visual search in clutter Abstracts Invited Talks: Geoffrey Burton Lecture, 2015 Professor Jan Atkinson UCL Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, Visiting Professor, University of Oxford Visual Development Unit, London and Oxford The Developing Visual Brain – from Newborns to Numeracy Tracking the development of visual abilities in infants and young children, as well as revealing the roots of adult vision, provides a unique window into the developing visual brain, both typical and atypical. Our work has helped to establish the major transition from a largely subcortical visual system at birth to the characteristic mechanisms of cortical vision and their control over subcortical visual responses. Delays in this development in the first year of life can be measured through orientation-specific responses, the cortical control of attention shifts, the timing of cortical event-related potentials, and the onset of visuomotor and visuocognitive milestones. These measures have proved to be sensitive indicators of the effects of early brain injury and premature birth in predicting later neurocognitive outcomes. Not all parts of the cortical visual system are equally vulnerable. Tests of children’s sensitivity to global form and global motion ( coherence thresholds) show that the global motion system, while developing early, is particularly impaired in a wide range of developmental disorders, both genetic and acquired ( in Williams Syndrome, autism, Fragile X, congenital cataract, hemiplegia, preterm birth). This differential impairment has led us to the hypothesis of ‘dorsal stream vulnerability’ in which poor motion performance is associated with a cluster of attentional, spatial, and visuomotor deficits. Our recent work with a large cohort of typically developing children in San Diego shows that individual differences in global motion sensitivity are associated with the area of a region of the intraparietal sulcus which has been widely implicated in mathematical cognition. Consistent with this, children’s global motion, but not global form, performance, is correlated with measures of mathematical achievement and numerosity judgments. We can speculate on how far reaching these differences in early visual brain development really are, and what are the dynamics of alternative developmental pathways. Professor Innes C. Cuthill School of Biological Sciences, Life Sciences Building, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol Matching the background: deceptively simple? Animal camouflage comprises a suite of adaptations for concealment, variously exploiting different mechanisms of perception in the species from which it is important to remain undetected or unrecognised. However, the intuitively simplest form of camouflage, matching the background, is not without controversy and some issues remain unexplored. What the early writers on camouflage called ‘background picturing’ or ‘generalised resemblance’ has resolved into a theory of background matching that characterises animal colour patterns as statistical samples of the background. Military camouflage is based on similar principles, with modern patterns based on the spatiochromatic statistics of natural backgrounds. However, in the biological literature, there is disagreement about whether such sampling should be random and what is the optimal camouflage when an animal lives in multiple habitats. The latter issue is paralleled in military deployment of uniforms claimed to be ‘multi-terrain’ in functionality, as opposed to the traditional palette of habitat-specific woodland, desert, arctic or urban designs. Optimising a pattern for background matching pattern is further complicated by the fact that real animals, or soldiers, are 3D objects, the camouflage potentially undermined by shape from shading cues. Most considerations of camouflage comprise a 2D animal on a 2D background, and the (historically venerable but, until recently, mathematically primitive) literature on 3D object concealment has been very confused as to what such patterns achieve. I will review these areas of debate in the light of new theory and research on background matching, pointing to new research questions that need to be answered. Professor Mark Georgeson School of Life & Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, UK Early spatial vision: a view through two eyes Simple features such as edges are the building blocks of spatial vision, and so I ask: how are visual features and their properties (location, blur and contrast) derived from the responses of spatial filters in early vision; how are these elementary visual signals combined across the two eyes; and when are they not combined? Our psychophysical evidence from blur-matching experiments strongly supports a model in which edges are found at the spatial peaks of response of odd-symmetric receptive fields (gradient operators), and their blur B is given by the spatial scale of the most active operator. This model can explain some surprising aspects of blur perception: edges look sharper when they are low contrast, and when their length is made shorter. Our experiments on binocular fusion of blurred edges show that single vision is maintained for disparities up to about 2.5*B, followed by diplopia or suppression of one edge at larger disparities. Edges of opposite polarity never fuse. Fusion may be served by binocular combination of monocular gradient operators, but that combination - involving binocular summation and interocular suppression - is not completely understood. In particular, linear summation (supported by psychophysical and physiological evidence) predicts that fused edges should look more blurred with increasing disparity (up to 2.5*B), but results surprisingly show that edge blur appears constant across all disparities, whether fused or diplopic. Finally, when edges of very different blur are shown to the left and right eyes fusion may not occur, but perceived blur is not simply given by the sharper edge, nor by the higher contrast. Instead, it is the ratio of contrast to blur that matters: the edge with the steeper gradient dominates perception. The early stages of binocular spatial vision speak the language of luminance gradients. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Body Painting Type Analysis Based on Biomimicry Camouflage
    International Journal of Architecture, Arts and Applications 2020; 6(1): 1-11 http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/ijaaa doi: 10.11648/j.ijaaa.20200601.11 ISSN: 2472-1107 (Print); ISSN: 2472-1131 (Online) Review Article Body Painting Type Analysis Based on Biomimicry Camouflage Eun-Young Park Department of Bioengineering, Graduate School of Konkuk University, Seoul, South Korea Email address: To cite this article: Eun-Young Park. Body Painting Type Analysis Based on Biomimicry Camouflage. International Journal of Architecture, Arts and Applications. Vol. 6, No. 1, 2020, pp. 1-11. doi: 10.11648/j.ijaaa.20200601.11 Received: November 26, 2019; Accepted: December 20, 2019; Published: January 7, 2020 Abstract: The purpose of this study is to establish a method and find a possible way of applying biomimicry camouflage in body painting. This study seeks a direction for the future of the beauty and art industry through biomimicry. For this study, we analyzed the works by classifying camouflage body painting into passive and active camouflage sections based on the application of biomimicry to the artificial camouflage system. In terms of detailed types, passive camouflage was classified into general resemblance and special resemblance, and active camouflage into adventitious resemblance and variable protective resemblance, and expression characteristics and type were derived. Passive camouflage is the work of the pictorial expressive technique using aqueous and oily body painting products. The general resemblance was expressed as a body painting of crypsis and camouflage strategies. The special resemblance is a mimicry in which the human body camouflages the whole figure of living organisms or inanimate objects.
    [Show full text]
  • Arbeitsvorhaben 2015/2016
    ^o_bfqpsloe^_bk=abo=cbiiltp = = = cbiiltp Û =molgb`qp= OMNRLOMNS= Herausgeber: Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin Wallotstraße 19 14193 Berlin Tel.: +49 30 89 00 1-0 Fax: +49 30 89 00 1-300 [email protected] wiko-berlin.de Redaktion: Angelika Leuchter Redaktionsschluss: 17. Juli 2015 Dieses Werk ist lizenziert unter einer Creative Commons Namensnennung - Nicht-kommerziell - Keine Bearbeitung 3.0 Deutschland Lizenz INHALT VORWORT ________________________________ 4 L A I T H A L - SHAWAF _________________________ 6 D O R I T B A R - ON ____________________________ 8 TATIANA BORISOVA ________________________ 10 V I C T O R I A A . BRAITHWAITE __________________ 12 JANE BURBANK ____________________________ 14 ANNA MARIA BUSSE BERGER __________________ 16 T I M C A R O ________________________________ 18 M I R C E A C Ă RTĂ RESCU _______________________ 20 B A R B A R A A . CASPERS _______________________ 22 DANIEL CEFAÏ _____________________________ 24 INNES CAMERON CUTHIL L ___________________ 26 LORRAINE DASTON _________________________ 28 CLÉMENTINE DELISS ________________________ 30 HOLGER DIESSEL ___________________________ 32 ELHADJI IBRAHIMA DIO P ____________________ 34 PAULA DROEGE ____________________________ 36 DIETER EBERT _____________________________ 38 FINBARR BARRY FLOOD ______________________ 40 RAGHAVENDRA GADAGKAR __________________ 42 PETER GÄRDENFORS ________________________ 44 LUCA GIULIANI ____________________________ 46 SUSAN GOLDIN - MEADOW ____________________ 48 M I C H A E L D . GORDIN ________________________ 50
    [Show full text]
  • Escape Distance in Ground-Nesting Birds Differs with Individual Level of Camouflage
    ORE Open Research Exeter TITLE Escape distance in ground-nesting birds differs with individual level of camouflage AUTHORS Wilson-Aggarwal, J; Troscianko, J; Stevens, M; et al. JOURNAL American Naturalist DEPOSITED IN ORE 30 March 2016 This version available at http://hdl.handle.net/10871/20871 COPYRIGHT AND REUSE Open Research Exeter makes this work available in accordance with publisher policies. A NOTE ON VERSIONS The version presented here may differ from the published version. If citing, you are advised to consult the published version for pagination, volume/issue and date of publication Escape distance in ground-nesting birds differs with individual level of camouflage Authors: J.K. Wilson-Aggarwal*1, J.T. Troscianko1, M. Stevens†1 and C.N. Spottiswoode2,3 Corresponding Authors: * [email protected] † [email protected] 1 Centre for Ecology & Conservation, College of Life & Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn, Cornwall, TR10 9FE, UK. 2 University of Cambridge, Department of Zoology, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK 3 DST-NRF Centre of Excellence at the Percy FitzPatrick Institute, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa Key words Camouflage, background matching, escape behaviour, ground-nesting birds, incubation To be published as an article with supplementary materials in the expanded online edition. Includes: Abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, figure 1, figure 2, table 1, online appendix A, figure A1 and table A1. 1 Abstract Camouflage is one of the most widespread anti-predator strategies in the animal kingdom, yet no animal can match its background perfectly in a complex environment. Therefore, selection should favour individuals that use information on how effective their camouflage is in their immediate habitat when responding to an approaching threat.
    [Show full text]
  • Establishing the Behavioural Limits for Countershaded Camouflage
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Establishing the behavioural limits for countershaded camoufage Olivier Penacchio1, Julie M. Harris1 & P. George Lovell2 Countershading is a ubiquitous patterning of animals whereby the side that typically faces the highest Received: 15 June 2017 illumination is darker. When tuned to specifc lighting conditions and body orientation with respect to Accepted: 20 September 2017 the light feld, countershading minimizes the gradient of light the body refects by counterbalancing Published: xx xx xxxx shadowing due to illumination, and has therefore classically been thought of as an adaptation for visual camoufage. However, whether and how crypsis degrades when body orientation with respect to the light feld is non-optimal has never been studied. We tested the behavioural limits on body orientation for countershading to deliver efective visual camoufage. We asked human participants to detect a countershaded target in a simulated three-dimensional environment. The target was optimally coloured for crypsis in a reference orientation and was displayed at diferent orientations. Search performance dramatically improved for deviations beyond 15 degrees. Detection time was signifcantly shorter and accuracy signifcantly higher than when the target orientation matched the countershading pattern. This work demonstrates the importance of maintaining body orientation appropriate for the displayed camoufage pattern, suggesting a possible selective pressure for animals to orient themselves appropriately to enhance crypsis. Te evolution of animal coloration is afected by several constraints including communication, thermoregulation, protection against ultra-violet radiation and visual camoufage1–3. Countershading is a patterning where the parts of the body that usually face the direction of maximum illumination, usually the back, are darker than parts facing in the opposite direction4,5.
    [Show full text]
  • VRC 2018 Programme (PDF, 416Kb)
    Vision Researchers Colloquium Tuesday 3rd July 2018 Queen’s Building, University of Bristol Keynote by Jenny Read Professor of Vision Science Newcastle University In partnership with: Vision Researchers Colloquium 2018 Programme 09:00 Registration, tea and coffee 09:30 Welcome by BVI Director, Professor David Bull Sessi Chaired by Professor Innes Cuthill, University of Bristol Kjernsmo, Karin, University of Bristol: Iridescence as camouflage? Impaired object 09:35 recognition in bumblebees 09:55 Daly, Ilse, University of Bristol: Complex gaze stabilisation in mantis shrimp 10:15 Robert, Theo, University of Exeter: Flexibility in bumblebees learning flights Talas, Laszlo, University of Bristol: The “Camouflage Machine”: Optimising patterns 10:35 for camouflage and visibility 10:55 Break – tea and coffee Sessio Chaired by Professor Darren Cosker, University of Bath 11:15 Saquil, Yassir, University of Bath: Generative models for semantic data exploration Gale, Ella, University of Bristol: Characterising and manipulating the learned 11:35 representation of visual data in deep-neural networks trained to classify images Kangin, Dimitry, University of Exeter: Reinforcement learning for vision-based 11:55 control Masullo, Alessandro, University of Bristol: CaloriNet: From silhouette to calorie 12:15 estimation in private environments 12:35 Lunch and poster presentations Sessio Chaired by Dr Natalie Hempel de Ibarra, University of Exeter Keynote: Jenny Read, Professor of Vision Science, Newcastle University: Of mantids 14:00 and men: Stereoscopic
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Avoid Visually Noisy Environments That Reduce Their Perceptual Abilities
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.09.07.279711; this version posted September 9, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. Fish avoid visually noisy environments that reduce their perceptual abilities Joanna R. Attwell1, Christos C. Ioannou1, Chris R. Reid2 & James E. Herbert-Read3,4 1 Department of Life Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK 2 Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia 3 Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK 4 Department of Aquatic Ecology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden Keywords: Perception, Virtual Prey, Gasterosteus aculeatus, Caustics, Environmental Noise. 1 Abstract 2 The environment contains different forms of ecological noise that can reduce the ability of 3 animals to detect information. Here we ask whether animals can adapt their behaviour to either 4 exploit or avoid areas of their environment with increased dynamic visual noise. By immersing 5 three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) into environments with a simulated form of 6 naturally occurring visual noise – light bands created by the refraction of light from surface 7 waves termed caustic networks – we tested how such visual noise affected the movements, 8 habitat use, and perceptual abilities of these fish. Fish avoided areas of higher visual noise, and 9 achieved this by increasing their activity as a function of the locally perceived noise level, 10 resulting in individuals moving away from noisier areas. By projecting virtual prey into the 11 environment with different levels of visual noise, we found that the fish’s ability to visually 12 detect prey decreased as visual noise increased.
    [Show full text]
  • Spectacular Phenomena and Limits to Rationality in Genetic and Cultural Evolution∗
    Spectacular phenomena and limits to rationality in genetic and cultural evolution∗ Magnus Enquist1,2, Anthony Arak3, Stefano Ghirlanda1, and Carl-Adam Wachtmesiter1 1Group for interdisciplinary cultural research, Stockholm University, Kräftriket 7B, 112 36 Stockholm 2Zoology Institution, Stockholm University, Svante Arrheniusvägen 14D, 112 36 Stockholm 3Archway Engineering (UK) Ltd, Elland, HX5 9JP, U.K. Reprint of December 3, 2006 Abstract In studies of both animal and human behaviour, game theory is used as a tool for understanding strategies that appear in interactions between individuals. Game theory focuses on adaptive behaviour, which can be attained only at evolutionary equilibrium. Here we suggest that behaviour appearing dur- ing interactions is often outside the scope of such analysis. In many types of interaction, conflicts of interest exist between players, fueling the evolu- tion of manipulative strategies. Such strategies evolve out of equilibrium, commonly appearing as spectacular morphology or behaviour with obscure meaning, to which other players may react in non-adaptive, irrational ways. We present a simple model to show some limitations of the game theory ∗First published in Transactions of the Royal Society of London B357, 1585–1594, 2002 (spe- cial issue on game theory and evolution). Permission to reproduce in any form is granted provided no alterations are made, no fees are requested, and notice of first publication is included. Cor- responding author (as of December 3, 2006): Anthony Arak, [email protected]. Minor language differences may be present relative to the published version. 1 approach, and outline the conditions in which evolutionary equilibria can- not be maintained. Evidence from studies of biological interactions seems to support the view that behaviour is often not at equilibrium.
    [Show full text]
  • From the President
    Supplement to Behavioral Ecology Editorial Contents of this Issue This issue contains another suite of book and workshop Editorial 1-2 reviews. I would like to thank all the contributors who Contributions to the ISBE Newsletter 2 volunteered their time to submit these, as the quality of Current Executive 3 contributions continues to be excellent. In addition, there Society News 4 are a few other highlights to the current Newsletter to A 19-year retrospective look at the ISBE 5-6 which I would like to direct members. Newsletter First, congratulations goes out to one of the society’s Wendy J. King, ISBE Archivist members, Innes Cuthill, for receiving one of two Book Reviews More Than Kin and Less Than Kind: The 7-8 Nature/NESTA awards for creative mentoring in science Evolution of Family Conflict. (see announcement in Society News on page 4). The (Mock 2004) results, recently appearing in Nature (2005, vol 434, page Review by Jonathan Wright 421), announced that Innes was awarded the prize for a Ecology and Evolution of Cooperative 9-10 Breeding in Birds mid-career researcher who has shown exemplary conduct (Koenig & Dickinson, eds 2004) in mentoring. Next time you see Innes at a conference, Review by Aldo Poiani make sure to give him a pat on the back. Biology and Conservation of Wild Canids 11-13 (Macdonald & Sillero-Zubiri, eds 2004) In Fall 2004, Wendy King (ISBE Archivist) arranged to Review by Graziella Iossa have all of the past issues of the ISBE Newsletter Avoiding Attack. The evolutionary ecology 13-14 converted into pdf format for archiving on the of crypsis, warning signals and mimicry Newsletter’s webpage.
    [Show full text]
  • Authors' Copy of Accepted Manuscript in PNAS Optimizing Countershading
    Authors’ copy of accepted manuscript in PNAS Optimizing countershading camouflage Innes C. Cuthilla, N. Simon Sangheraa, Olivier Penacchiob, P. George Lovelld, Graeme D. Ruxtonc and Julie M. Harrisb a School of Biological Sciences, Life Sciences Building, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK b School of Psychology and Neuroscience, South Street, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, Fife KY16 9JP UK c School of Biology, Dyers Brae, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, Fife KY16 9TH UK d Division of Psychology, Social and Health Sciences, Abertay University, Dundee, DD1 1HG, UK Corresponding author: Innes Cuthill. Address as above. Tel.: +44 117 394 1175 E-mail: [email protected] Classification: BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES: Ecology Keywords: camouflage, defensive coloration, animal coloration, shape-from-shading, shape perception Authors’ copy of accepted manuscript in PNAS Abstract Countershading, the widespread tendency of animals to be darker on the side that receives strongest illumination, has classically been explained as an adaptation for camouflage: obliterating cues to 3D shape and enhancing background matching. However, there have only been two quantitative tests of whether the patterns observed in different species match the optimal shading to obliterate 3D cues, and no tests of whether optimal countershading actually improves concealment or survival. We use a mathematical model of the light field to predict the optimal countershading for concealment that is specific to the light environment, then test this with correspondingly patterned model “caterpillars” exposed to avian predation in the field. We show that the optimal countershading is strongly illumination dependent. A relatively sharp transition in surface patterning from dark to light is only optimal under direct solar illumination; if there is diffuse illumination from cloudy skies or shade, the pattern provides no advantage over homogeneous background-matching coloration.
    [Show full text]
  • Background Matching, Disruptive Coloration, Distraction Marks, Countershading and Masquerade Have Their Effects
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Explore Bristol Research Cuthill, I. (2019). Camouflage. Journal of Zoology, 308(2), 75-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/jzo.12682 Peer reviewed version Link to published version (if available): 10.1111/jzo.12682 Link to publication record in Explore Bristol Research PDF-document This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via Wiley at https://zslpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jzo.12682 . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. University of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research General rights This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/user- guides/explore-bristol-research/ebr-terms/ Huxley Review, Journal of Zoology Camouflage Innes C. Cuthill School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Life Sciences Building, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK Corresponding author: Innes Cuthill. Address as above. Tel.: +44 117 394 1175 E-mail: [email protected] Short title: Camouflage Author’s copy (as accepted, 12/04/2019), Journal of Zoology 1 Huxley Review, Journal of Zoology Abstract Animal camouflage has long been used to illustrate the power of natural selection, and provides an excellent testbed for investigating the trade-offs affecting the adaptive value of colour. However, the contemporary study of camouflage extends beyond evolutionary biology, co-opting knowledge, theory and methods from sensory biology, perceptual and cognitive psychology, computational neuroscience and engineering.
    [Show full text]
  • Priming Effect and Pre-Exposure Aggression in Siamese Fighting Fish
    Priming effect and pre-exposure aggression in Siamese fighting fish Bertucci, Frédéric; Matos, Ricardo Jorge Santa Clara; Dabelsteen, Torben Publication date: 2008 Document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Citation for published version (APA): Bertucci, F., Matos, R. J. S. C., & Dabelsteen, T. (2008). Priming effect and pre-exposure aggression in Siamese fighting fish. Paper presented at European Conference on Behavioural Biology, Dijon, France. Download date: 23. Sep. 2021 Programme, Information and Abstracts 1 4th European Conference on Behavioural Biology Dijon 2008 FOURTH EUROPEAN CONFERENCE ON BEHAVIOURAL BIOLOGY SPECIAL FOCUS: INTERSPECIFIC INTERACTIONS TH TH DIJON, JULY 18 – 20 2008 2 Notes 3 CONTENTS: WELCOME 4 INFORMATIONS 5 PROGRAMME 9 ORAL SESSIONS ABSTRACTS 31 POSTER ABSTRACTS 203 PARTICIPANT LIST 363 4 Welcome to the 4th European Conference on Behavioural Biology in Dijon, France. We very much thank the following institutions and companies for donations and financial support: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) Université de Bourgogne Conseil Régional de Bourgogne Communauté d’Agglomération du Grand Dijon Société Française d’Etude du Comportement Animal (SFECA) Cambridge University Press Noldus Oxford University Press Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Wiley Blackwell Please make sure to wear your name-badge during the whole conference. The badge is your ticket for lunch and coffee. 5 Informations Internet Access A wifi connection will be available at a dedicated place within the congress centre: please check the information board at the entrance for password. Banquet on Saturday 19th The Banquet will be organized at the" Domaine du Lac Kir", at 20 min driving from the Palais des Congrès.
    [Show full text]
  • Cuthill, I., Sanghera, S., Penacchio
    Cuthill, I. , Sanghera, S., Penacchio, O., Lovell, G., Ruxton, G. D., & Harris, J. M. (2016). Optimizing countershading camouflage. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(46), 13093–13097. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611589113 Peer reviewed version Link to published version (if available): 10.1073/pnas.1611589113 Link to publication record in Explore Bristol Research PDF-document This is the author accepted manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via PNAS at http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2016/11/01/1611589113. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. University of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research General rights This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/red/research-policy/pure/user-guides/ebr-terms/ Authors’ copy of accepted manuscript in PNAS Optimizing countershading camouflage Innes C. Cuthilla, N. Simon Sangheraa, Olivier Penacchiob, P. George Lovelld, Graeme D. Ruxtonc and Julie M. Harrisb a School of Biological Sciences, Life Sciences Building, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK b School of Psychology and Neuroscience, South Street, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, Fife KY16 9JP UK c School of Biology, Dyers Brae, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, Fife KY16 9TH UK d Division of Psychology, Social and Health Sciences, Abertay University, Dundee, DD1
    [Show full text]