Data from: Use of visual display in dark, cluttered environments
Data files
Feb 14, 2025 version files 11.75 GB
-
README.md
1.81 KB
-
Supplementary_Photo_Dataset.zip
11.75 GB
Abstract
Animals living in dense vegetation are limited in their use of visual signals due to the transmission constraints in these dim, cluttered environments. Birds in such habitats are often drab in appearance and thought to rely predominately on acoustic signals for conspecific communication. Here, we investigate the presence and use of a concealed underwing patch in the family Cettiidae. We find that this distinct white patch is widely present in the genus Horornis, with limited evidence for its presence in other genera. In response to simulated territorial intrusions, two species, Horornis fortipes and Cettia castaneocoronata perform wing-flicking displays which results in a flashing effect in Horornis fortipes. The presence of white underwings raises interesting possibilities about the role of hidden achromatic patches in facilitating visual communication in habitats traditionally thought to be unprofitable for this modality.
https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.s1rn8pkhs
Description of the data and file structure
We have included two sets of supplementary data:
- A supplementary photo dataset, used to assess underwing patch presence
- Code for creating figure S2 in the supplement published with the paper.
Files and variables
File: Supplementary_Photo_Dataset.zip
Description: This zip folder contains 22 folders labeled by the species name. In each folder are photographs of individual specimens with their underwing coverts exposed. These specimens correspond to those listed in Table S2. To assess whether underwing coverts formed a distinct patch we examined specimens available at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, Illinois. We gently raised the wing with a pair of forceps and photographed the visible underwing coverts. Many species had limited specimens, and we examined all that were available. For species with many specimens, we assessed a maximum of 10 males and 10 females. We defined the presence of an underwing patch by the following criteria: the feathers on the underwing coverts had to be white or whitish in coloration and had to contrast with adjacent flank feathers and surrounding flight feathers. If most individuals in a species met these criteria, we labeled white underwing patches as “present”. If white underwings were absent in some individuals but present in others, we labeled that species as “variable”. Species that did not have white underwing coverts were labeled as “absent”.
Code: Cettiidae_Rates_Code.R
Description: Code to generate figure S2. The relevant file, Table_S5, can be found published with the paper.