Dataset Information

The evolution of patterning during movement in a large-scale citizen science game.

ABSTRACT: The motion dazzle hypothesis posits that high contrast geometric patterns can cause difficulties in tracking a moving target and has been argued to explain the patterning of animals such as zebras. Research to date has only tested a small number of patterns, offering equivocal support for the hypothesis. Here, we take a genetic programming approach to allow patterns to evolve based on their fitness (time taken to capture) and thus find the optimal strategy for providing protection when moving. Our 'Dazzle Bug' citizen science game tested over 1.5 million targets in a touch screen game at a popular visitor attraction. Surprisingly, we found that targets lost pattern elements during evolution and became closely background matching. Modelling results suggested that targets with lower motion energy were harder to catch. Our results indicate that low contrast, featureless targets offer the greatest protection against capture when in motion, challenging the motion dazzle hypothesis.

SUBMITTER: Hughes AE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7892415 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The evolution of patterning during movement in a large-scale citizen science game.

Hughes Anna E AE Griffiths David D Troscianko Jolyon J Kelley Laura A LA

Proceedings. Biological sciences 20210113 1942

The motion dazzle hypothesis posits that high contrast geometric patterns can cause difficulties in tracking a moving target and has been argued to explain the patterning of animals such as zebras. Research to date has only tested a small number of patterns, offering equivocal support for the hypothesis. Here, we take a genetic programming approach to allow patterns to evolve based on their fitness (time taken to capture) and thus find the optimal strategy for providing protection when moving. O ...[more]

PMID: 33434457

Similar Datasets

Project description:Large-scale observational data from citizen science efforts are becoming increasingly common in ecology, and researchers often choose between these and data from intensive local-scale studies for their analyses. This choice has potential trade-offs related to spatial scale, observer variance, and interannual variability. Here we explored this issue with phenology by comparing models built using data from the large-scale, citizen science USA National Phenology Network (USA-NPN) effort with models built using data from more intensive studies at Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) sites. We built statistical and process based phenology models for species common to each data set. From these models, we compared parameter estimates, estimates of phenological events, and out-of-sample errors between models derived from both USA-NPN and LTER data. We found that model parameter estimates for the same species were most similar between the two data sets when using simple models, but parameter estimates varied widely as model complexity increased. Despite this, estimates for the date of phenological events and out-of-sample errors were similar, regardless of the model chosen. Predictions for USA-NPN data had the lowest error when using models built from the USA-NPN data, while LTER predictions were best made using LTER-derived models, confirming that models perform best when applied at the same scale they were built. This difference in the cross-scale model comparison is likely due to variation in phenological requirements within species. Models using the USA-NPN data set can integrate parameters over a large spatial scale while those using an LTER data set can only estimate parameters for a single location. Accordingly, the choice of data set depends on the research question. Inferences about species-specific phenological requirements are best made with LTER data, and if USA-NPN or similar data are all that is available, then analyses should be limited to simple models. Large-scale predictive modeling is best done with the larger-scale USA-NPN data, which has high spatial representation and a large regional species pool. LTER data sets, on the other hand, have high site fidelity and thus characterize inter-annual variability extremely well. Future research aimed at forecasting phenology events for particular species over larger scales should develop models that integrate the strengths of both data sets.

Project description:Citizen science-the involvement of volunteers in data collection, analysis and interpretation-simultaneously supports research and public engagement with science, and its profile is rapidly rising. Citizen science represents a diverse range of approaches, but until now this diversity has not been quantitatively explored. We conducted a systematic internet search and discovered 509 environmental and ecological citizen science projects. We scored each project for 32 attributes based on publicly obtainable information and used multiple factor analysis to summarise this variation to assess citizen science approaches. We found that projects varied according to their methodological approach from 'mass participation' (e.g. easy participation by anyone anywhere) to 'systematic monitoring' (e.g. trained volunteers repeatedly sampling at specific locations). They also varied in complexity from approaches that are 'simple' to those that are 'elaborate' (e.g. provide lots of support to gather rich, detailed datasets). There was a separate cluster of entirely computer-based projects but, in general, we found that the range of citizen science projects in ecology and the environment showed continuous variation and cannot be neatly categorised into distinct types of activity. While the diversity of projects begun in each time period (pre 1990, 1990-99, 2000-09 and 2010-13) has not increased, we found that projects tended to have become increasingly different from each other as time progressed (possibly due to changing opportunities, including technological innovation). Most projects were still active so consequently we found that the overall diversity of active projects (available for participation) increased as time progressed. Overall, understanding the landscape of citizen science in ecology and the environment (and its change over time) is valuable because it informs the comparative evaluation of the 'success' of different citizen science approaches. Comparative evaluation provides an evidence-base to inform the future development of citizen science activities.

Project description:Citizen science platforms are quickly accumulating hundreds of millions of biodiversity observations around the world annually. Quantifying and correcting for the biases in citizen science datasets remains an important first step before these data are used to address ecological questions and monitor biodiversity. One source of potential bias among datasets is the difference between those citizen science programs that have unstructured protocols and those that have semi-structured or structured protocols for submitting observations. To quantify biases in an unstructured citizen science platform, we contrasted bird observations from the unstructured iNaturalist platform with that from a semi-structured citizen science platform-eBird-for the continental United States. We tested whether four traits of species (body size, commonness, flock size, and color) predicted if a species was under- or over-represented in the unstructured dataset compared with the semi-structured dataset. We found strong evidence that large-bodied birds were over-represented in the unstructured citizen science dataset; moderate evidence that common species were over-represented in the unstructured dataset; strong evidence that species in large groups were over-represented; and no evidence that colorful species were over-represented in unstructured citizen science data. Our results suggest that biases exist in unstructured citizen science data when compared with semi-structured data, likely as a result of the detectability of a species and the inherent recording process. Importantly, in programs like iNaturalist the detectability process is two-fold-first, an individual organism needs to be detected, and second, it needs to be photographed, which is likely easier for many large-bodied species. Our results indicate that caution is warranted when using unstructured citizen science data in ecological modelling, and highlight body size as a fundamental trait that can be used as a covariate for modelling opportunistic species occurrence records, representing the detectability or identifiability in unstructured citizen science datasets. Future research in this space should continue to focus on quantifying and documenting biases in citizen science data, and expand our research by including structured citizen science data to understand how biases differ among unstructured, semi-structured, and structured citizen science platforms.

Dataset Information

The evolution of patterning during movement in a large-scale citizen science game.

Publications

The evolution of patterning during movement in a large-scale citizen science game.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets