The influence of ultraviolet reflectance differs between conspicuous aposematic signals in neotropical butterflies and poison frogs

Abstract

Abstract Warning signals are often characterized by highly contrasting, distinctive, and memorable colors. Greater chromatic (hue) and achromatic (brightness) contrast have both been found to contribute to greater signal efficacy, making longwave colored signals (e.g., red and yellow), that are perceived by both chromatic and achromatic visual pathways, particularly common. Conversely, shortwave colors (e.g., blue and ultraviolet) do not contribute to luminance perception yet are also commonly found in warning signals. Our understanding of the role of UV in aposematic signals is currently incomplete as UV perception is not universal, and evidence for its utility is at best mixed. We used visual modeling to quantify how UV affects signal contrast in aposematic heliconiian butterflies and poison frogs both of which reflect UV wavelengths, occupy similar habitats, and share similar classes of predators. Previous work on butterflies has found that UV reflectance does not affect predation risk but is involved in mate choice. As the butterflies, but not the frogs, have UV‐sensitive vision, the function of UV reflectance in poison frogs is currently unknown. We found that despite showing up strongly in UV photographs, UV reflectance only appreciably affected visual contrast in the butterflies. As such, these results support the notion that although UV reflectance is associated with intraspecific communication in butterflies, it appears to be nonfunctional in frogs. Consequently, our data highlight that we should be careful when assigning a selection‐based benefit to the presence of UV reflectance.

Keywords

• aposematism
• butterflies
• coloration
• Dendrobatidae
• sexual signals
• UV reflection