Evolutionary Ecology

, Volume 27, Issue 4, pp 755–767 | Cite as

Loss of conspicuous coloration has co-evolved with decreased body size in populations of poison dart frogs

  • Andreas Rudh
Original Paper


Larger signal size is known to facilitate the learning process of predators to warning signals. Further, smaller objects are generally harder to detect than large, which suggests that smaller sized prey are less likely to benefit from an aposematic strategy compared to crypsis. However, whether body size changes in concert with shifts between crypsis and aposematism in natural populations, remains largely unexplored. I tested whether body size was larger in visually conspicuous population than in cryptic populations among recently diverged populations of the Strawberry Poison frog, Oophaga pumilio. By analysing spectral reflectance and body size data from individuals from 18 discrete populations I found a larger mean body size in conspicuous populations, which was confirmed by an analysis of a subset of 12 populations accounting for phylogenetic history. This shows that the loss of conspicuous colour likely co-evolved repeatedly with a decrease in body size. Thus, selection on body size may influence evolutionary shifts between aposematism and crypsis and vice versa.


Dendrobates pumilio Warning signal Crypsis Population differentiation Anura Amphibia 



I thank the Panamanian authorities A.N.A.M for the scientific permit (SE/A-100-07); Dirección Nacional de Politica Indigenista, community leaders and landholders of Bocas del Toro and Comarca Ngäbe-Buglé. I thank the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute staff at Bocas del Toro and Martin Breed and Simon Hultby for help in the field. Thanks to Alejandro Gonzalez Voyer for discussions on the statistics and helpful comments, I. Wang and B. Shaffer for kindly providing the phylogeny, Anders Ödeen and Olle Håstad for technical advice related to spectrophotometry and visual modelling, Anna Qvarnström, Jacob Höglund, Niclas Kolm, David Wheatcroft, Katarzyna Kulma, Jason L. Brown and two anonymous reviewers for comments on earlier versions of the manuscript and Björn Rogell for fieldwork and comments. The work was funded by The Swedish Research Council, The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences and Stiftelsen för zoologisk forskning.


  1. Anderson RP, Handley CO (2001) A new species of three-toed sloth (Mammalia : Xenarthra) from Panama, with a review of the genus Bradypus. Proc Biol Soc Wash 114:1–33Google Scholar
  2. Björkman C, Larsson S (1991) Pine sawfly defense and variation in host plant resin acids—a trade-off with growth. Ecol Entomology 16:283–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown JL, Maan ME, Cummings ME et al (2010) Evidence for selection on coloration in a Panamanian poison frog: a coalescent-based approach. J Biogeogr 37:891–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brusa O, Bellati A, Meuche I et al (2012) Divergent evolution in the polymorphic granular poison-dart frog, Oophaga granulifera: genetics, coloration, advertisement calls and morphology. J Biogeogr 40:394–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cott HB (1940) Adaptive coloration in animals. Methuen & CO. LTD, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Crothers L, Gering E, Cummings M (2011) Aposematic signal variation predicts male–male interactions in a polymorphic poison frog. Evolution 65:599–605PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Daly JW, Myers CW (1967) Toxicity of panamanian poison frogs (Dendrobates): some biological and chemical aspects. Science 156:970–973PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dennis RLH, Hodgson JG, Hardy PB et al (2012) Strategies for size and growth in butterflies (Insecta: Lepidoptera): counterintuitive trends and unique solutions to achieving maturity. J Nat Hist 46:2415–2437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dimitrova M, Merilaita S (2010) Prey concealment: visual background complexity and prey contrast distribution. Behav Ecol 21:176–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Endler JA (1988) Frequency-dependent predation, crypsis and aposematic coloration. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B-Biol Sci 319:505–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Endler JA (1993) The color of light in forests and its implications. Ecol Monogr 63:1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Forsman A, Merilaita S (1999) Fearful symmetry: pattern size and asymmetry affects aposematic signal efficacy. Evol Ecol 13:131–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fritz G, Rand AS, dePamphilis CW (1981) The aposematically colored frog, Dendrobates pumilo, is distasteful to the large, predatory ant, paraponera clavata. Biotropica 13:158–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gagliardo A, Guilford T (1993) Why do warning-colored prey live gregariously. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B-Biol Sci 251:69–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gamberale G, Tullberg BS (1996) Evidence for a peak-shift in predator generalization among aposematic prey. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B-Biol Sci 263:1329–1334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gamberale G, Tullberg BS (1998) Aposematism and gregariousness: the combined effect of group size and coloration on signal repellence. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B-Biol Sci 265:889–894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gittleman JL, Harvey PH (1980) Why are distasteful prey not cryptic? Nature 286:149–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gittleman JL, Harvey PH, Greenwood PJ (1980) The evolution of conspicuous coloration some experiments in bad taste. Anim Behav 28:897–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gover N, Jarvis JR, Abeyesinghe SM et al (2009) Stimulus luminance and the spatial acuity of domestic fowl (Gallus g. domesticus). Vision Res 49:2747–2753PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hagemann S, Pröhl H (2007) Mitochondrial paraphyly in a polymorphic poison frog species (Dendrobatidae; D.pumilio). Mol Phylogenet Evol 45:740–747PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hagman M, Forsman A (2003) Correlated evolution of conspicuous coloration and body size in poison frogs (Dendrobatidae). Evolution 57:2904–2910PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Hart NS (2002) Vision in the peafowl (Aves : Pavo cristatus). J Exp Biol 205:3925–3935PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Håstad O, Ödeen A (2008) Different ranking of avian colors predicted by modeling of retinal function in humans and birds. Am Nat 171:831–838PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Håstad O, Victorsson J, Ödeen A (2005) Differences in color vision make passerines less conspicuous in the eyes of their predators. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:6391–6394PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hauswaldt JS, Ludewig AK, Vences M et al (2011) Widespread co-occurrence of divergent mitochondrial haplotype lineages in a Central American species of poison frog (Oophaga pumilio). J Biogeogr 38:711–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Heinrich B (1979) Foraging strategies of caterpillars. Oecologia 42:325–337Google Scholar
  27. Kotiaho J, Alatalo RV, Mappes J et al (1998) Male mating success and risk of predation in a wolf spider: a balance between sexual and natural selection? J Anim Ecol 67:287–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lind O (2011) Bird vision: spatial acuity and colour discrimination in bright and dim light. Doctoral thesis, Lund UniversityGoogle Scholar
  29. Lind O, Kelber A (2011) The spatial tuning of achromatic and chromatic vision in budgerigars. J Vis 11:9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lindström L, Alatalo RV, Mappes J et al (1999) Can aposematic signals evolve by gradual change? Nature 397:249–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Maan ME, Cummings ME (2008) Female preferences for aposematic signal components in a polymorphic poison frog. Evolution 62:2334–2345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Maan ME, Cummings ME (2009) Sexual dimorphism and directional sexual selection on aposematic signals in a poison frog. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:19072–19077PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Maan ME, Cummings ME (2012) Poison frog colors are honest signals of toxicity, particularly for bird predators. Am Nat 179:E1–E14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mand T, Tammaru T, Mappes J (2007) Size dependent predation risk in cryptic and conspicuous insects. Evol Ecol 21:485–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Martins EP, Hansen TF (1997) Phylogenies and the comparative method: a general approach to incorporating phylogenetic information into the analysis of interspecific data. Am Nat 149:646–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nilsson M, Forsman A (2003) Evolution of conspicuous colouration, body size and gregariousness: a comparative analysis of lepidopteran larvae. Evol Ecol 17:51–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nokelainen O, Hegna RH, Reudler JH et al (2012) Trade-off between warning signal efficacy and mating success in the wood tiger moth. Proc R Soc B-Biol Sci 279:257–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Noonan BP, Comeault AA (2009) The role of predator selection on polymorphic aposematic poison frogs. Biol Lett 5:51–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Osorio D, Smith AC, Vorobyev M et al (2004) Detection of fruit and the selection of primate visual pigments for color vision. Am Nat 164:696–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Paradis E, Claude J, Strimmer K (2004) APE: analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R language. Bioinformatics 20:289–290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S et al (2008) nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package. 3.1–90 edGoogle Scholar
  42. Poulin B, Lefebvre G, Ibanez R et al (2001) Avian predation upon lizards and frogs in a neotropical forest understorey. J Trop Ecol 17:21–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Poulton EB (1890) The colours of animals. Their meaning and use. Especially considered in the case of insects. D. Appelton and Company, New York: New YorkGoogle Scholar
  44. Pröhl H, Ostrowski T (2011) Behavioural elements reflect phenotypic colour divergence in a poison frog. Evol Ecol 25:993–1015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pröhl H, Hagemann S, Karsch J et al (2007) Geographic variation in male sexual signals in strawberry poison frogs (Dendrobates pumilio). Ethology 113:825–837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Prudic KL, Skemp AK, Papaj DR (2007) Aposematic coloration, luminance contrast, and the benefits of conspicuousness. Behav Ecol 18:41–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Remmel T, Tammaru T (2009) Size-dependent predation risk in tree-feeding insects with different colouration strategies: a field experiment. J Anim Ecol 78:973–980PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Reynolds RG, Fitzpatrick BM (2007) Assortative mating in poison-dart frogs based on an ecologically important trait. Evolution 61:2253–2259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rowellrahier M, Pasteels JM (1986) Economics of chemical defense in Chrysomelinae. J Chem Ecol 12:1189–1203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rudh A, Rogell B, Höglund J (2007) Non-gradual variation in colour morphs of the strawberry poison frog Dendrobates pumilio: genetic and geographical isolation suggest a role for selection in maintaining polymorphism. Mol Ecol 16:4284–4294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rudh A, Rogell B, Håstad O et al (2011) Rapid population divergence linked with co-variation between coloration and sexual display in strawberry poison frogs. Evolution 65:1271–1282PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rudh A, Breed M, Qvarnström A (2013) Does aggression and explorative behaviour decrease with lost warning colouration? Biol J Linn Soc 108:116–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ruxton GD, Sherratt TN, Speed MP (2004) Avoiding attack. The evolutionary ecology of crypsis, warning signals & mimicry. Oxford University Press: OxfordGoogle Scholar
  54. Ruxton GD, Speed MP, Broom M (2009) Identifying the ecological conditions that select for intermediate levels of aposematic signalling. Evol Ecol 23:491–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Santos JC, Cannatella DC (2011) Phenotypic integration emerges from aposematism and scale in poison frogs. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:6175–6180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Saporito RA, Garraffo HM, Donnelly MA et al (2004) Formicine ants: an arthropod source for the pumiliotoxin alkaloids of dendrobatid poison frogs. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:8045–8050PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Saporito RA, Donnelly MA, Garraffo HM et al (2006) Geographic and seasonal variation in alkaloid-based chemical defenses of Dendrobates pumilio from Bocas del Toro, Panama. J Chem Ecol 32:795–814PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Saporito RA, Donnelly MA, Norton RA et al (2007a) Oribatid mites as a major dietary source for alkaloids in poison frogs. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:8885–8890PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Saporito RA, Zuercher R, Roberts M et al (2007b) Experimental evidence for aposematism in the dendrobatid poison frog Oophaga pumilio. Copeia 4:1006–1011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Savage JM (2002) The amphibians and reptiles of costa rica: a herpetofauna between two continents. Between Two Seas University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  61. Siddiqi A, Cronin TW, Loew ER et al (2004) Interspecific and intraspecific views of color signals in the strawberry poison frog Dendrobates pumilio. J Exp Biol 207:2471–2485PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sillén-Tullberg B (1988) Evolution of gregariousness in aposematic butterfly larvae—a phylogenetic analysis. Evolution 42:293–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Speed MP, Brockhurst MA, Ruxton GD (2010) The dual benefits of aposematism: predator avoidance and enhanced resource collection. Evolution 64:1622–1633PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Summers K, Bermingham E, Weigt L et al (1997) Phenotypic and genetic divergence in three species of dart-poison frogs with contrasting parental behavior. J Hered 88:8–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Summers K, Symula R, Clough M et al (1999) Visual mate choice in poison frogs. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B-Biol Sci 266:2141–2145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Summers K, Cronin TW, Kennedy T (2003) Variation in spectral reflectance among populations of Dendrobates pumilio, the strawberry poison frog, in the Bocas del Toro Archipelago, Panama. J Biogeogr 30:35–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Summers K, Cronin TW, Kennedy T (2004) Cross-breeding of distinct color morphs of the strawberry poison frog (Dendrobates pumilio) from the Bocas del Toro Archipelago, Panama. J Herpetol 38:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Szelistowski WA (1985) Unpalatability of the Poison Arrow Frog Dendrobates pumilio to the Ctenid Spider Cupiennius coccineus. Bioptrica 17:345–346Google Scholar
  69. Vorobyev M, Osorio D (1998) Receptor noise as a determinant of colour thresholds. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B-Biol Sci 265:351–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wang IJ (2011) Inversely related aposematic traits: reduced conspicuousness evolves with increased toxicity in a polymorphic poison-dart frog. Evolution 65:1637–1649PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wang IJ, Shaffer HB (2008) Rapid color evolution in an aposematic species: a phylogenetic analysis of color variation in the strikingly polymorphic strawberry poison-dart frog. Evolution 62:2742–2759PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wang IJ, Summers K (2010) Genetic structure is correlated with phenotypic divergence rather than geographic isolation in the highly polymorphic strawberry poison-dart frog. Mol Ecol 19:447–458PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Weldon PJ, Kramer M, Gordon S et al (2006) A common pumiliotoxin from poison frogs exhibits enantioselective toxicity against mosquitoes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:17818–17821PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Animal Ecology, Dept. Ecology and GeneticsUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations