Ecology and evolution of primate colour vision

More than one hundred years ago, Grant Allen suggested that colour vision in primates, birds and insects evolved as an adaptation for foraging on colourful advertisements of plants-fruits and flowers. Recent studies have shown that well developed colour vision appeared long before fruits and flowers evolved. Thus, colour vision is generally beneficial for many animals, not only for those eating colourful food. Primates are the only placental mammals that have trichromatic colour vision. This may indicate either that trichromacy is particularly useful for primates or that primates are unique among placental mammals in their ability to utilise the signals of three spectrally distinct types of cones or both. Because fruits are an important component of the primate diet, primate trichromacy could have evolved as a specific adaptation for foraging on fruits. Alternatively, primate trichromacy could have evolved as an adaptation for many visual tasks. Comparative studies of mammalian eyes indicate that primates are the only placental mammals that have in their retina a pre-existing neural machinery capable of utilising the signals of an additional spectral type of cone. Thus, the failure of non-primate placental mammals to evolve trichromacy can be explained by constraints imposed on the wiring of retinal neurones.

Interspecific variation in the use of carotenoid-based coloration in birds: diet, life history and phylogeny

Birds show striking interspecific variation in their use of carotenoid-based coloration. Theory predicts that the use of carotenoids for coloration is closely associated with the availability of carotenoids in the diet but, although this prediction has been supported in single-species studies and those using small numbers of closely related species, there have been no broad-scale quantitative tests of the link between carotenoid coloration and diet. Here we test for such a link using modern comparative methods, a database on 140 families of birds and two alternative avian phylogenies. We show that carotenoid pigmentation is more common in the bare parts (legs, bill and skin) than in plumage, and that yellow coloration is more common than red. We also show that there is no simple, general association between the availability of carotenoids in the diet and the overall use of carotenoid-based coloration. However, when we look at plumage coloration separately from bare part coloration, we find there is a robust and significant association between diet and plumage coloration, but not between diet and bare part coloration. Similarly, when we look at yellow and red plumage colours separately, we find that the association between diet and coloration is typically stronger for red coloration than it is for yellow coloration. Finally, when we build multivariate models to explain variation in each type of carotenoid-based coloration we find that a variety of life history and ecological factors are associated with different aspects of coloration, with dietary carotenoids only being a consistent significant factor in the case of variation in plumage. All of these results remain qualitatively unchanged irrespective of the phylogeny used in the analyses, although in some cases the precise life history and ecological variables included in the multivariate models do vary. Taken together, these results indicate that the predicted link between carotenoid coloration and diet is idiosyncratic rather than general, being strongest with respect to plumage colours and weakest for bare part coloration. We therefore suggest that, although the carotenoid-based bird plumage may a good model for diet-mediated signalling, the use of carotenoids in bare part pigmentation may have a very different functional basis and may be more strongly influenced by genetic and physiological mechanisms, which currently remain relatively understudied.

Estimating nutrient intake in comparative studies of animals: an example using dietary carotenoid content in birds

Many different methods of reporting animal diets have been used in ecological research. These vary greatly in level of accuracy and precision and therefore complicate attempts to measure and compare diets, and quantitites of nutrients in those diets, across a wide range of taxa. For most birds, the carotenoid content of the diet has not been directly measured. Here, therefore, I use an avian example to show how different methods of measuring the quantities of various foods in the diet affect the relative rankings of higher taxa (families, subfamilies, and tribes), and species within these taxa, with regard to the carotenoid contents of their diets. This is a timely example, as much recent avian literature has focused on the way dietary carotenoids may be traded off among aspects of survival, fitness and signalling. I assessed the mean dietary carotenoid contents of representatives of thirty higher taxa of birds using four different carotenoid intake indices varying in precision, including trophic levels, a coarse-scale and a fine-scale categorical index, and quantitative estimates of dietary carotenoids. This last method was used as the benchmark. For comparisons among taxa, all but the trophic level index were significantly correlated with each other. However, for comparisons of species within taxa, the fine-scale index outperformed the coarse-scale index, which in turn outperformed the trophic level index. In addition, each method has advantages and disadvantages, as well as underlying assumptions that must be considered. Examination and comparison of several possible methods of diet assessment appears to highlight these so that the best possible index is used given available data, and it is recommended that such a step be taken prior to the inclusion of estimated nutrient intake in any statistical analysis. Although applied to avian carotenoids here, this method could readily be applied to other taxa and types of nutrients.