QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

This Article Summary Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Maddocks, S. A. Articles by Cuthill, I. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Maddocks, S. A. Articles by Cuthill, I. C.

The effects of the light environment on prey choice by zebra finches

Sam A. Maddocks, Stuart C. Church and Innes C. Cuthill^*

Centre for Behavioural Biology and Ecology of Vision Group, School of Biological Sciences, Woodland Road, Bristol, BS8 1UG, UK

View larger version (42K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Plan view of the apparatus used in experiments 1 and 2, consisting of a central chamber with four arms, ending in detachable cages. Filters are placed horizontally over the cages in each arm of the apparatus. During each trial, there is one test bird in each arm and four companion birds in the central chamber (indicated by x).

View larger version (24K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. (A) The relative irradiance of the Truelite tubes used in the experiment (quantal flux scaled to a maximum of 1). A logarithmic y-axis is used because of the large spikes in emission at certain wavelengths; this is typical of fluorescent lighting. (B) Mean reflectance spectra for each seed type and corresponding stone distracter used in experiment 1 (w-st, white stone; w-sd, white seed; r-st, red stone; r-sd, red seed), plus the brown hardboard background (h-bd) used in experiment 2. Reflectance is relative to a 99% white reflectance standard.

View larger version (12K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Histogram indicating the numbers of each seed type (red or white) eaten under ‘cryptic’ and ‘conspicuous’ treatments (the presence or absence of stone distracters; D+ or D-), with or without ultraviolet (UV+ or UV-) wavelengths. Values are means + S.E.M. (N=8 birds).

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. (A) Mean transmission spectra for the four filter types used in experiment 2; ultraviolet-blocking (UV-), short-wavelength-blocking (SW-), medium-wavelength-blocking (MW-) and long-wavelength-blocking (LW-). (B–D) The relative distance in tetrachromatic colour space between the white and red seeds (W-R), the white seeds and the hardboard background (W-B), and the red seeds and the background (R-B) under natural light and the four filter types (B). (C) Equivalent distances calculated for a single-cone-mediated achromatic (brightness) mechanism. (D) Equivalent distances for a putative double-cone-mediated achromatic (brightness) mechanism.

View larger version (10K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Numbers of each seed type eaten under each of the four filter types (see Fig.4A). Values are mean + S.E.M. (N=8 birds).