Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Ecology and Evolution logoLink to Ecology and Evolution
. 2019 Sep 27;9(20):11824–11832. doi: 10.1002/ece3.5686

Conserved visual sensitivities across divergent lizard lineages that differ in an ultraviolet sexual signal

Caroline M Dong 1,2,✉, Claire A McLean 1,2, Adnan Moussalli 2, Devi Stuart‐Fox 1
PMCID: PMC6822044  PMID: 31695890

Abstract

The sensory drive hypothesis predicts the correlated evolution of signaling traits and sensory perception in differing environments. For visual signals, adaptive divergence in both color signals and visual sensitivities between populations may contribute to reproductive isolation and promote speciation, but this has rarely been tested or shown in terrestrial species. We tested whether opsin protein expression differs between divergent lineages of the tawny dragon (Ctenophorus decresii) that differ in the presence/absence of an ultraviolet sexual signal. We measured the expression of four retinal cone opsin genes (SWS1, SWS2, RH2, and LWS) using droplet digital PCR. We show that gene expression between lineages does not differ significantly, including the UV wavelength sensitive SWS1. We discuss these results in the context of mounting evidence that visual sensitivities are highly conserved in terrestrial systems. Multiple competing requirements may constrain divergence of visual sensitivities in response to sexual signals. Instead, signal contrast could be increased via alternative mechanisms, such as background selection. Our results contribute to a growing understanding of the roles of visual ecology, phylogeny, and behavior on visual system evolution in reptiles.

Keywords: cone opsin, Ctenophorus decresii, ddPCR, gene expression, sensory drive, visual ecology

The sensory drive hypothesis predicts that the coevolution of signaling traits and sensory perception may contribute to reproductive isolation and speciation. We tested whether opsin protein expression differs between divergent lineages of the tawny dragon (Ctenophorus decresii) that differ in the presence/absence of an ultraviolet sexual signal. We found that gene expression does not differ and discuss these results in the context of mounting evidence that visual sensitivities are highly conserved in terrestrial systems. Photo credit: Adam Elliott.

graphic file with name ECE3-9-11824-g003.jpg

1. INTRODUCTION

When a species exists across habitats of varying physical and structural properties, communication systems may adapt to the local environment to optimize the efficacy of signal transmission and interpretation (Endler, 1992, 1993a). This idea is central to the sensory drive hypothesis, which proposes a correlated divergence in signaling traits (e.g., color), sensory perception (e.g., vision), and mate preferences (Endler & Basolo, 1998). The scale and consistency of adaptive divergence in mating signals and perception can influence whether it leads to speciation or the maintenance of color variation within the species (Chunco, McKinnon, & Servedio, 2007; Gray & McKinnon, 2007; Seehausen et al., 2008). Despite more than 25 years of research on sensory drive, the majority of work has focused on aquatic systems, where ambient illumination varies substantially and consistently (reviewed in Cummings & Endler, 2018). Furthermore, most evidence for tuning of color vision to different color signals comes from taxonomic groups that show substantial variation in the number and spectral sensitivities of photoreceptors, such as butterflies and teleost fishes (Bernard & Remington, 1991; Briscoe et al., 2010; Carleton, Parry, Bowmaker, Hunt, & Seehausen, 2005; Hoffmann et al., 2007; Miyagi et al., 2012; Sison‐Mangus, 2006).

In many groups, including birds and reptiles, the number and spectral sensitivities of photoreceptors are highly conserved. However, visual sensitivities can be influenced by the relative proportion of different photoreceptor types (and therefore cone opsin expression) in the retina (reviewed in Carleton, 2014). For example, in New World warblers (Parulidae), relative opsin expression is associated with plumage dichromatism and light environment (Bloch, 2015). Similarly, a high abundance of ultraviolet (UV) sensitive cones have been associated with the presence of a UV signal in a lizard (Fleishman, Loew, & Whiting, 2011). Opsin gene expression may evolve more readily in response to varying selection than opsin spectral tuning (i.e., changing the wavelength of peak photoreceptor sensitivity, λ max). However, evidence for an association between visual signals and color vision achieved by modifying the relative gene expression of cone opsins is currently limited in terrestrial species (Bloch, Morrow, Chang, & Price, 2015; Coyle, Hart, Carleton, & Borgia, 2012; Tseng et al., 2018; Yewers et al., 2015).

The tawny dragon lizard (Ctenophorus decresii; Duméril & Bibron, 1837) is a good candidate for examining changes in visual sensitivity associated with divergence of a sexual signal and the signaling environment. The species comprises two genetically and phenotypically distinct lineages which differ markedly in a sexual color signal, male throat coloration (Figure 1). Northern lineage males are polymorphic with four discrete throat morphs: orange, yellow, yellow with an orange center, and gray (Teasdale, Stevens, & Stuart‐Fox, 2013), all of which lack significant UV reflectance. By contrast, southern lineage males are monomorphic with UV‐blue throats with a consistent UV reflectance peak (McLean, Stuart‐Fox, & Moussalli, 2014). This throat coloration is prominently displayed during territorial and courtship displays involving head‐bobbing and push‐ups (Gibbons, 1979, 1977; Osborne, Umbers, Backwell, & Keogh, 2012; Stuart‐Fox & Johnston, 2005) and is locally adapted to increase conspicuousness against the predominant background colors of native lichen in their respective ranges (McLean, Moussalli, & Stuart‐Fox, 2014). The northern lineage is primarily found in semi‐arid sparsely vegetated habitats, whereas the southern lineage occurs in wetter, temperate, more vegetated habitats (Houston, 1974).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Sampling localities and male throat colors of the tawny dragon (Ctenophorus decresii). (a) Map showing localities in the northern and southern lineages. Elevated rocky ranges are shaded in gray. Average reflectance of male throat colors found in the (b) northern lineage: orange, yellow, gray, and in the (c) southern lineage: blue. Ultraviolet wavelengths are highlighted in gray; (d) Representative male throats for each color

Characteristic of diurnal lizards, C. decresii has tetrachromatic vision with UV sensitive (SWS1; 364–383 nm), short‐wavelength sensitive (SWS2; 440–467 nm), medium‐wavelength sensitive (rod‐like cone opsin RH2; 483–501 nm), and long‐wavelength sensitive (LWS; 560–625 nm) cone opsins and one rod opsin (RH1; Yewers et al., 2015). There are no significant differences in the absorption spectra of visual pigments between lineages of C. decresii, nor in amino acid sequences of opsin genes (Yewers et al., 2015). However, color discrimination may be fine‐tuned by differences in the relative proportion of photoreceptor types rather than shifts in their peak wavelength sensitivities. Given the occurrence of locally adapted throat coloration in C. decresii, we hypothesized that the lineages may differ in visual sensitivities via the relative expression of cone opsin genes. Specifically, we predicted that the southern lineage would exhibit higher expression of the UV sensitive SWS1 opsin gene due to the UV reflectance peak found on male throats.

2. METHODS

2.1. Animals

We analyzed the visual sensitivities of seven northern lineage (six males and one female) and nine southern lineage (seven males and two females) individuals (Table 1). We focused primarily on males because in C. decresii, males compete for access to females and opportunities for female male choice appear to be limited, as is generally the case in lizards (Lailvaux & Irschick, 2006; Lebas & Marshall, 2001; Olsson & Madsen, 1995; Smith & Zucker, 1997; Tokarz, 1995). Male–male interactions are therefore the strongest determinants of mating success in territorial lizards (Gullberg, Olsson, & Tegelstrom, 1997; Simon, 2011; Stamps & Krishnan, 1997; Tokarz, 1998); however, we included a subset of females for comparison. Northern lineage individuals were wild‐caught by noosing or by hand from Caroona Creek Conservation Park (longitude: 139.103, latitude: −33.443), Telowie Gorge Conservation Park (longitude: 138.106, latitude: −33.023), or Warren Gorge, South Australia (longitude: 137.995, latitude: −32.183). Southern lineage individuals were captured from Palmer, South Australia (longitude: 139.159, latitude: −34.851) or were hatched from eggs laid by gravid females captured from Palmer and raised in captivity to sexual maturity (>1 year; Gibbons, 1977). The subjects were housed individually in opaque plastic tubs (55 × 34 × 38 cm [L × W × D]) with sand and two terracotta tiles to provide shelter and a basking platform. Lizards were kept in captivity between 3 months to 1.5 years at The University of Melbourne, Melbourne and Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. They were provided with artificial lighting and seasonal photoperiods to approximate natural conditions, including UV lighting and a heat lamp for thermoregulation. Lizards were fed crickets ad libitum and misted with water 3 days a week. Although individuals differed slightly in age and period of time in captivity, all were sexually mature at the time of sampling and suitable to investigate consistent differences in visual sensitivities between lineages. This research was conducted with approval from the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, South Australia (permit nos. E25861‐4 and Q26428‐3), the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Victoria (permit nos. 10007000 and 10007751) and with approval by the University of Melbourne Animals Ethics Committee (approval nos. 1312927.1 and 1413220.4), the Wildlife Ethics Committee of South Australia (approval nos. 35/2013 and 25/2015), and the Deakin Animal Ethics Committee (project no. G39‐2013).

Table 1.

Details of all individuals used in the study, including their lineage, sex, capture locality, housing facility, and length of housing (months)

ID Lineage Sex Locality Housing Months
NM1 N M Telowie Gorge CP Deakin University 3
NM2 N M Telowie Gorge CP Deakin University 3
NM3 N M Caroona Creek CP Deakin University 3
NM4 N M Telowie Gorge CP Deakin University 3
NM5 N M Warren Gorge The University of Melbourne 3
NM6 N M Caroona Creek CP The University of Melbourne 18
NF1 N F Caroona Creek CP The University of Melbourne 18
SM1 S M Palmer Deakin University 3
SM2 S M Palmer Deakin University 3
SM3 S M Palmer Deakin University 3
SM4 S M Captive‐bred (Palmer) The University of Melbourne 6
SM5 S M Captive‐bred (Palmer) The University of Melbourne 6
SM6 S M Captive‐bred (Palmer) The University of Melbourne 6
SM7 S M Captive‐bred (Palmer) The University of Melbourne 6
SF1 S F Palmer The University of Melbourne 8
SF2 S F Palmer The University of Melbourne 4
Open in a new tab

2.2. Quantification of opsin expression

Following humane euthanasia, eyeballs were immediately removed, hemisected, and stored in RNAlater (Ambion Inc.) at −20°C. Whole retinas were dissected for each individual before being disrupted and homogenized using the TissueLyser II with 3 mm stainless steel beads (Qiagen). Total RNA was extracted using an RNeasy Mini Kit (Qiagen) and quantified on a 220 TapeStation (RIN scores >8.0; Agilent). For each sample, 200 ng of total RNA was reverse‐transcribed to cDNA using a qPCRBIO cDNA Synthesis Kit (PCR Biosystems) and opsin gene expression was measured using droplet digital PCR (ddPCR), a method of digital PCR that implements a water‐in‐oil droplet system using the Bio‐Rad QX100 system (detailed methods in Hindson et al., 2011). This method provides absolute quantification of copies of the PCR target, without the use of a standard curve, and has been shown to have comparable sensitivity to real‐time PCR with the advantages of greater precision and improved reproducibility (Hindson et al., 2013). We used a 25 ul reaction mix containing cDNA, primers (900 nM each), probe (250 nM), and ddPCR Supermix for Probes (no dUTP, Bio‐Rad). Using the QX100 Droplet Generator, this mixture is partitioned into 20,000 droplets and each droplet becomes an independent amplification event. The amplification protocol was as follows: 10 min at 95°C, 40 cycles of 30 s at 94°C and 1 min at 57°C, followed by 10 min at 98°C, ramp rate set to 2.5°C/s. Following amplification on a standard thermal cycler, droplets are analyzed on the QX100 Droplet Reader which counts the number of droplets containing the PCR target (positive) and droplets without (negative) in each sample. These data were analyzed with QuantaSoft Analysis Pro v1.0.596 (Bio‐Rad) which uses a Poisson distribution to determine the absolute template quantity (copies per µl). We then calculated relative opsin gene expression as a percentage of total cone opsin genes expressed for each individual.

We designed primers and probes for the four cone opsin genes (SWS1, SWS2, RH2, LWS; Table 2) based on published opsin sequences from retinal transcriptomes of C. decresii (Yewers et al., 2015) using Primer3 v4.1.0 (Koressaar & Remm, 2007; Untergasser et al., 2012). Additionally, primer binding sites were designed to span an exon–exon junction to avoid amplification of genomic DNA and amplified short fragments (75–200 bp). Intron–exon junctions were identified by aligning opsin gene sequences with the draft genome for C. decresii (McLean, Stuart‐Fox, and Moussalli, unpublished data) using Exonerate v2.2.0 (Slater & Birney, 2005). A single mix of primers and probes was used for each opsin gene for the length of the experiment.

Table 2.

Forward primer, probe, and reverse primer sequences for each of the four cone opsins

Opsin Forward primer Reverse primer Probe
SWS1 ACA GTT CAG GGC TTG CAT TA TGG AAG AGA CAG AGG AGA CC /56‐FAM/ACC CAT GAC/ZEN/AGA TGA ATC CGA CGT /3IABkFQ/
SWS2 CAA GGC CTC CTC AGT TTA CAA GAA CTC GAA ACA TCA TCT TCA TCA C /56‐FAM/TGA ACA AGC/ZEN/AGT TCC GCT CCT GTA /3IABkFQ/
LWS GCT GTC ATT ATC CTC TGC TAC C CAC TTC CCT TTC AGC CTT CT /56‐FAM/CAG CAA CCG/ZEN/CAC GAA TAG CCA AC/3IABkFQ/
RH2 CTC AAA GAG TTC GTC CCT CTA TAA GTT CTT GCC ACA GCA GAT TG /56‐FAM/CGT CCT CAT/ZEN/GAA CAA GCA GTT CCG T/3IABkFQ/
Open in a new tab

2.3. Statistical analyses

We used a linear mixed‐effects model to examine the effects of lineage on opsin gene expression. Specifically, we had lineage, gene, and their interaction as fixed terms and included months in captivity, lizard ID, and age as random‐effect terms (opsin expression~lineage + gene + lineage*gene + (1|months) + (1|ID)) + (1|age). We used our model to examine the normality of residuals and found significant departure (Shapiro–Wilk normality test, p < .0001). We log‐transformed the data and confirmed normality (p = .30). The random‐effect terms each accounted for a negligible amount of variability in the model (<0.05 total variance). Further, we repeated this analysis on a dataset comprising only males (excluding females; opsin expression~lineage + gene + lineage*gene + (1|months) + (1|ID) + (1|age)). Statistical tests were performed in R v3.3 (R Core Development Team, 2017) with the packages effects (Fox, 2003), lme4 (Bates, Mächler, Bolker, & Walker, 2014), and lmerTest (Kuznetsova, 2017). We conducted a post hoc power analysis in the program G*Power v3.1.9.4 (Faul, Erdfelder, Buchner, & Lang, 2009; Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner, 2007), and determined that the datasets comprising all samples and adult males had powers of 0.94 and 0.86, respectively. A power of 0.80 is generally regarded as an appropriate level of statistical power (Cohen, 1988).

3. RESULTS

There were no significant differences in gene expression of individual cone opsins between the northern and southern lineages (p > .05; Table 3). For the full dataset, the mean relative gene expression ± SE for the northern lineage was 0.011 ± 0.007, 0.044 ± 0.022, 0.373 ± 0.224, 0.572 ± 0.201 (SWS1, SWS2, RH2, LWS, respectively). Likewise for the southern lineage, mean relative gene expression ± SE was 0.007 ± 0.002, 0.032 ± 0.013, 0.286 ± 0.129, 0.675 ± 0.124 (Figure 2a). We found significant differences between opsin genes (p < .0001; Table 3). The relative expression patterns for the four opsin genes were similar between lineages with SWS1 as the lowest expressed gene, followed by SWS2, RH2, and LWS as the most highly expressed gene (northern = 1:4:33.9:52, southern = 1:4.6:40.1:96.4). Analysis of the subset of males recovered qualitatively similar results with no significant differences in expression of each cone opsin between the northern and southern lineages (p > .05; Table 3). The mean relative expression ± SE for the northern lineage was 0.013 ± 0.006, 0.047 ± 0.021, 0.310 ± 0.164, 0.630 ± 0.142; expression for the southern lineage was 0.007 ± 0.002, 0.036 ± 0.014, 0.286 ± 0.145, 0.671 ± 0.139 (SWS1, SWS2, RH2, LWS, respectively; Figure 2b). Relative expression patterns were also similar between lineages and to the full dataset (northern = 1:3.7:24: 48.7, southern = 1:5.2:41.6:97.4).

Table 3.

Results of linear mixed‐effects models on all individuals (N = 16) and a subset of only males (N = 13), statistically significant values are italicized

  All Individuals Males
df F p df F p
Lineage 1 0.59 .448 1 0.78 .382
Gene 3 275.72 <.0001 3 206.94 <.0001
Lineage × Gene 3 1.0 .397 3 0.75 .530
Open in a new tab

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Mean relative expressions (copies per µl) of the four cone opsin genes in the northern and southern lineages for (a) all individuals and (b) a subset of only males. 95% confidence bounds were calculated using parameters estimated from the fitted model

4. DISCUSSION

The coevolution of color signals and vision is central to the sensory drive hypothesis, a key proposed mechanism of adaptive divergence and speciation. We examined visual sensitivities of C. decresii and found no evidence that relative opsin gene expression levels correspond to divergence between lineages which differ in the presence/absence of a UV sexual signal. We found differences in expression between the four opsin genes; this was similar to the relative expression estimated from transcriptome sequencing in C. decresii wherein SWS1 and LWS were the lowest and highest expressed genes but small sample sizes limited further statistical inferences (northern = 1:2.4:2.5:31, N = 1; southern = 1.1:2.1:1: 19, N = 1; SWS1:SWS2:RH2:LWS; Yewers et al., 2015). A similar hierarchy has been found in the abundance of visual pigments in other squamate taxa (Barbour et al., 2002; Bowmaker, Loew, & Ott, 2005; Tseng et al., 2018). Our results support the hypothesis that diurnal lizards share a highly conserved ancestral pattern of tetrachromatic vision extending into the ultraviolet spectrum as characterized in the families Agamidae (Barbour et al., 2002; Yewers et al., 2015), Chamaeleonidae (Bowmaker et al., 2005), Cordylidae (Fleishman et al., 2011), Dactyloidae (Kawamura & Yokoyama, 1998; Loew, Fleishman, Foster, & Provencio, 2002; Provencio, Loew, & Foster, 1992), and Lacertidae (de Lanuza & Font, 2014). In general, reptiles have retained the set of opsin genes (SWS1, SWS2, RH2, LWS, RH1) inferred to have been present in the ancestral vertebrate (Cronin, Johnsen, Marshall, & Warrant, 2014).

These findings add to the growing body of evidence suggesting that the coevolution of color signals and visual systems is rare in terrestrial systems (Lind, Henze, Kelber, & Osorio, 2017). The strength of selection on visual sensitivities to optimize signal perception is likely to be weaker in terrestrial than aquatic systems because terrestrial light environments are less distinct and more variable over time and space whereas aquatic systems vary more steeply and consistently in background radiance (Chiao, Vorobyev, Cronin, & Osorio, 2000; Endler, 1993b; Goldsmith, 1990; Levine & MacNichol, 1979). Although the lineages of C. decresii differ in broad aspects of their habitat (aridity and vegetation cover), both prefer brightly lit open perches and irradiance spectra from full sun conditions are similar across northern and southern localities (McLean, Moussalli, et al., 2014). Moreover, the magnitude of changes in irradiance over a diurnal cycle are likely to be much greater than the overall variation in light conditions between lineages (Endler, 1993b).

The greater variability of terrestrial environments allows for behavioral adjustments to select backgrounds with spectral properties which optimize signal contrast. In C. decresii, adults are almost exclusively found on rocks and the colors of the native rock and lichen differs between lineages. Gray and pink rocks with orange lichen are found in the range of the southern lineage whereas orange rocks with pale green lichen are principally found in the range of the northern lineage. The throat coloration of each lineage has been shown to be more chromatically conspicuous against the predominant native lichen color background and less conspicuous against native rock color backgrounds (McLean, Moussalli, et al., 2014). This suggests that individuals could select a background substrate to maximize contrast or crypsis. There is evidence from various terrestrial taxa of local adaptation and/or that individuals can select or modify their environment to alter their conspicuousness (Bortolotti, Stoffel, & Galvan, 2011; Endler & Day, 2006; Endler & Thery, 1996; Gunderson, Fleishman, & Leal, 2018; Heindl & Winkler, 2003; Klomp, Stuart‐Fox, Das, & Ord, 2017; Leal & Fleishman, 2002; Macedonia, 2001; Marshall, Philpot, & Stevens, 2016; Nafus et al., 2015; Sicsú, Manica, Maia, & Macedo, 2013; Uy & Endler, 2004). For example, two closely related species of Anolis lizards, A. cooki, and A. cristatellus, differ markedly in dewlap UV reflectance and have adaptively diverged in microhabitat preference to select light conditions that maximize signal contrast (Leal & Fleishman, 2002). However, similar to our findings, there are no significant differences in spectral sensitivity between ecologically diverse species of Anolis with varying dewlap colorations (Fleishman et al., 1997; Loew et al., 2002).

Other ecological factors may generate selection pressures on aspects of the visual system that constrain divergence in response to sexual signals. Visual systems have evolved to accommodate a broad gauntlet of activities critical to survival and fitness. Lizards rely primarily on visual signals at longer distances (López & Martín, 2001; López, Martín, & Cuadrado, 2002; Whiting, Webb, & Keogh, 2009), and individuals must detect and interpret many objects in their environment including suitable shelter, potential rivals and mates, predators, and prey. The lineages of C. decresii share similar predominantly avian predators and a generalist diet of insects (Gibbons, 1977), which often have color patterns that reflect or absorb selectively in the UV spectrum (Théry & Gomez, 2010). Additionally, males of both lineages may need to interpret UV signals in females. In the closely related species Ctenophorus ornatus, males prefer females with higher throat UV reflectance (LeBas & Marshall, 2000). Female C. decresii have UV‐white throats and some exhibit yellow coloration on the throat and sides of the abdomen during the breeding season (Dong and Stuart‐Fox, Personal Observation). The function of female coloration in C. decresii is yet to be determined, but could indicate receptivity as in other closely related species (Stuart‐Fox & Goode, 2014). Thus, there may be stronger selection for visual sensitivities that optimize performance across a variety of tasks, than for those tuned to a specific sexually selected signal.

Visual sensitivities can vary in relation to a range of intrinsic and extrinsic factors, such as carotenoid availability, sex steroids, and light environment. For example, testosterone may regulate opsin expression in the sexually dimorphic green‐spotted grass lizard Takydromus viridipunctatus (Tseng et al., 2018). However, the great majority of evidence for environmental regulation of opsin expression comes from fish, which experience drastic changes in ambient light environment with habitat changes during ontogeny (Bowmaker & Kunz, 1987; Cheng, 2004; Cottrill et al., 2009; Shand, Archer, & Collin, 1999; Shand et al., 2008; Shand, Hart, Thomas, & Partridge, 2002) and even across diurnal cycles (Johnson, Stanis, & Fuller, 2013). It is possible that environmental factors contributed variation to our data; however, there were no differences in opsin gene expression between sexes and these groups do not differ in diet or habitat preferences (Gibbons, 1977).

5. CONCLUSIONS

In summary, we found no evidence for divergence in visual sensitivities between lineages of C. decresii that differ in the presence of a UV sexual signal. Our findings are consistent with weaker divergent selection on visual sensitivities within and between closely related species in terrestrial systems. The lack of divergence in visual sensitivities between lineages of C. decresii can likely be attributed to similar selection on color vision imposed by the abiotic and biotic environment. Instead, male C. decresii may increase conspicuousness of their throat coloration to conspecifics by selecting contrasting backgrounds. By testing for opsin expression divergence in a terrestrial reptile, our study contributes to a growing understanding of broad‐scale patterns in the coevolution of signals and sensory systems, and how they differ between taxonomic groups and environments.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

All authors contributed to study design and statistical analysis. CAM contributed to fieldwork. CMD designed primers, conducted ddPCR data collection, and wrote the manuscript. All authors edited and approved the final manuscript.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are grateful to Madeleine Yewers for access to tissue samples and fieldwork; Katrina Rankin for animal husbandry assistance; Jessica Hacking and Adam Elliott for fieldwork; Franca Casagranda for ddPCR guidance; and the landowners who granted access to their property for data collection. This work was supported by the Australian Research Council (DP1092908 to D.S.‐F.).

Dong CM, McLean CA, Moussalli A, Stuart‐Fox D. Conserved visual sensitivities across divergent lizard lineages that differ in an ultraviolet sexual signal. Ecol Evol. 2019;9:11824–11832. 10.1002/ece3.5686

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The dataset and R code are available from Dryad: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.0fg8g9h

REFERENCES

  1. Barbour, H. R. , Archer, M. A. , Hart, N. S. , Thomas, N. , Dunlop, S. A. , Beazley, L. D. , & Shand, J. (2002). Retinal characteristics of the ornate dragon lizard, Ctenophorus ornatus . The Journal of Comparative Neurology, 450, 334–344. 10.1002/cne.10308 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bates, D. , Mächler, M. , Bolker, B. , & Walker, S. (2014). Fitting linear mixed‐effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bernard, G. D. , & Remington, C. L. (1991). Color vision in Lycaena butterflies: Spectral tuning of receptor arrays in relation to behavioral ecology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 88, 2783–2787. 10.1073/pnas.88.7.2783 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bloch, N. I. (2015). Evolution of opsin expression in birds driven by sexual selection and habitat. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282, 20142321 10.1098/rspb.2014.2321 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bloch, N. I. , Morrow, J. M. , Chang, B. S. W. , & Price, T. D. (2015). SWS2 visual pigment evolution as a test of historically contingent patterns of plumage color evolution in warblers. Evolution, 69, 341–356. 10.1111/evo.12572 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bortolotti, G. R. , Stoffel, M. J. , & Galvan, I. (2011). Wintering Snowy Owls Bubo scandiacus integrate plumage colour, behaviour and their environment to maximize efficacy of visual displays. Ibis, 153, 134–142. 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2010.01067.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bowmaker, J. K. , & Kunz, Y. W. (1987). Ultraviolet receptors, tetrachromatic colour vision and retinal mosaics in the brown trout (Salmo trutta): Age‐dependent changes. Vision Research, 27, 2101–2108. 10.1016/0042-6989(87)90124-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bowmaker, J. K. , Loew, E. R. , & Ott, M. (2005). The cone photoreceptors and visual pigments of chameleons. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 191, 925–932. 10.1007/s00359-005-0014-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Briscoe, A. D. , Bybee, S. M. , Bernard, G. D. , Yuan, F. , Sison‐Mangus, M. P. , Reed, R. D. , … Chiao, C.‐C. (2010). Positive selection of a duplicated UV‐sensitive visual pigment coincides with wing pigment evolution in Heliconius butterflies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107, 3628–3633. 10.1073/pnas.0910085107 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Carleton, K. L. (2014). Visual photopigment evolution in speciation In Hunt D. M., Hankins M. W., Collin S. P. & Marshall N. J. (Eds.), Evolution of visual and non‐visual pigments (pp. 241–267). Boston, MA: Springer; 10.1007/978-1-4614-4355-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Carleton, K. L. , Parry, J. W. L. , Bowmaker, J. K. , Hunt, D. M. , & Seehausen, O. (2005). Colour vision and speciation in Lake Victoria cichlids of the genus Pundamilia . Molecular Ecology, 14, 4341–4353. 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02735.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Cheng, C. L. (2004). New mechanism for modulating colour vision. Nature, 428, 279 10.1038/428279a [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Chiao, C. C. , Vorobyev, M. , Cronin, T. W. , & Osorio, D. (2000). Spectral tuning of dichromats to natural scenes. Vision Research, 40, 3257–3271. 10.1016/S0042-6989(00)00156-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Chunco, A. J. , McKinnon, J. S. , & Servedio, M. R. (2007). Microhabitat variation and sexual selection can maintain male color polymorphisms. Evolution, 61, 2504–2515. 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00213.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar]
  16. Cottrill, P. B. , Davies, W. L. , Semo, M. , Bowmaker, J. K. , Hunt, D. M. , & Jeffery, G. (2009). Developmental dynamics of cone photoreceptors in the eel. BMC Developmental Biology, 9, 71 10.1186/1471-213X-9-71 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Coyle, B. J. , Hart, N. S. , Carleton, K. L. , & Borgia, G. (2012). Limited variation in visual sensitivity among bowerbird species suggests that there is no link between spectral tuning and variation in display colouration. Journal of Experimental Biology, 215, 1090–1105. 10.1242/jeb.062224 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Cronin, T. W. , Johnsen, S. , Marshall, N. J. , & Warrant, E. J. (2014). Visual pigments and photoreceptors In Visual ecology (pp. 37–65). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; https://books.google.com.au/books?xml:id=j2eYDwAAQBAJ&dq=Visual+pigments+and+photoreceptors+in+visual+ecology+2014 [Google Scholar]
  19. Cummings, M. E. , & Endler, J. A. (2018). 25 Years of sensory drive: The evidence and its watery bias. Current Zoology, 64, 471–484. 10.1093/cz/zoy043 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. de Lanuza, G. P. I. , & Font, E. (2014). Ultraviolet vision in lacertid lizards: Evidence from retinal structure, eye transmittance, SWS1 visual pigment genes and behaviour. Journal of Experimental Biology, 217, 2899–2909. 10.1242/jeb.104281 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Duméril, A. M. C. , & Bibron, G. (1837). Erpétologie générale ou Histoire naturelle complète des reptiles. Paris: 10.5962/bhl.title.45973. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Endler, J. A. (1992). Signals, signal conditions, and the direction of evolution. The American Naturalist, 139, S125–S153. 10.1086/285308 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Endler, J. A. (1993a). Some general comments on the evolution and design of animal communication systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 340, 215–225. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Endler, J. A. (1993b). The color of light in forests and its implications. Ecological Monographs, 63, 1–27. 10.2307/2937121 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Endler, J. A. , & Basolo, A. L. (1998). Sensory ecology, receiver biases and sexual selection. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 13, 415–420. 10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01471-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Endler, J. A. , & Day, L. B. (2006). Ornament colour selection, visual contrast and the shape of colour preference functions in great bowerbirds, Chlamydera nuchalis . Animal Behaviour, 72, 1405–1416. 10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.05.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Endler, J. A. , & Thery, M. (1996). Interacting effects of lek placement, display behavior, ambient light, and color patterns in three neotropical forest‐dwelling birds. The American Naturalist, 148, 421–452. 10.1086/285934 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  28. Faul, F. , Erdfelder, E. , Buchner, A. , & Lang, A.‐G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Faul, F. , Erdfelder, E. , Lang, A.‐G. , & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. 10.3758/BF03193146 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Fleishman, L. J. , Bowman, M. , Saunders, D. , Miller, W. E. , Rury, M. J. , & Loew, E. R. (1997). The visual ecology of Puerto Rican anoline lizards: Habitat light and spectral sensitivity. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 181, 446–460. 10.1007/s003590050128 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Fleishman, L. J. , Loew, E. R. , & Whiting, M. J. (2011). High sensitivity to short wavelengths in a lizard and implications for understanding the evolution of visual systems in lizards. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 278, 2891–2899. 10.1098/rspb.2011.0118 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Fox, J. (2003). Effect displays in R for generalised linear models. Journal of Statistical Software, 8, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  33. Gibbons, J. R. (1977). Comparative ecology and behaviour of lizards of the Amphibolurus decresii species complex. University of Adelaide. [Google Scholar]
  34. Gibbons, J. R. (1979). The hind leg pushup display of the Amphibolurus decresii species complex (Lacertilia: Agamidae). Copeia, 1, 29–40. 10.2307/1443725 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Goldsmith, T. H. (1990). Optimization, constraint, and history in the evolution of eyes. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 65, 281–322. 10.1086/416840 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Gray, S. M. , & McKinnon, J. S. (2007). Linking color polymorphism maintenance and speciation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 22, 71–79. 10.1016/j.tree.2006.10.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Gullberg, A. , Olsson, M. , & Tegelstrom, H. (1997). Male mating success, reproductive success and multiple paternity in a natural population of sand lizards: Behavioural and molecular genetics data. Molecular Ecology, 6, 105–112. 10.1046/j.1365-294X.1997.t01-1-00156.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Gunderson, A. R. , Fleishman, L. J. , & Leal, M. (2018). Visual “playback” of colorful signals in the field supports sensory drive for signal detectability. Current Zoology, 64, 493–498. 10.1093/cz/zoy046 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Heindl, M. , & Winkler, H. (2003). Interacting effects of ambient light and plumage color patterns in displaying Wire‐tailed Manakins (Aves, Pipridae ). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 53, 153–162. 10.1007/s00265-002-0562-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Hindson, B. J. , Ness, K. D. , Masquelier, D. A. , Belgrader, P. , Heredia, N. J. , Makarewicz, A. J. , … Colston, B. W. (2011). High‐throughput droplet digital PCR system for absolute quantitation of DNA copy number. Analytical Chemistry, 83, 8604–8610. 10.1021/ac202028g [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Hindson, C. M. , Chevillet, J. R. , Briggs, H. A. , Gallichotte, E. N. , Ruf, I. K. , Hindson, B. J. , … Tewari, M. (2013). Absolute quantification by droplet digital PCR versus analog real‐time PCR. Nature Methods, 10, 1003–1005. 10.1038/nmeth.2633 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Hoffmann, M. , Tripathi, N. , Henz, S. R. , Lindholm, A. K. , Weigel, D. , Breden, F. , & Dreyer, C. (2007). Opsin gene duplication and diversification in the guppy, a model for sexual selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society B‐Biological Sciences, 274, 33–42. 10.1098/rspb.2006.3707 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Houston, T. F. (1974). Revision of the Amphibolurus decresii complex (Lacertilia: Agamidae) of South Australia. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia, 98, 49–60. [Google Scholar]
  44. Johnson, A. M. , Stanis, S. , & Fuller, R. C. (2013). Diurnal lighting patterns and habitat alter opsin expression and colour preferences in a killifish. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 280, 20130796 10.1098/rspb.2013.0796 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Kawamura, S. , & Yokoyama, S. (1998). Functional characterization of visual and nonvisual pigments of American chameleon (Anolis carolinensis). Vision Research, 38, 37–44. 10.1016/s0042-6989(97)00160-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Klomp, D. A. , Stuart‐Fox, D. , Das, I. , & Ord, T. J. (2017). Gliding lizards use the position of the sun to enhance social display. Biology Letters, 13, 20160979 10.1098/rsbl.2016.0979 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Koressaar, T. , & Remm, M. (2007). Enhancements and modifications of primer design program Primer3. Bioinformatics, 23, 1289–1291. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm091 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Kuznetsova, A. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82, 1–26. 10.18637/jss.v082.i13. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Lailvaux, S. P. , & Irschick, D. J. (2006). No evidence for female association with high‐performance males in the green anole lizard, Anolis carolinensis . Ethology, 112, 707–715. 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2006.01210.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Leal, M. , & Fleishman, L. J. (2002). Evidence for habitat partitioning based on adaptation to environmental light in a pair of sympatric lizard species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 269, 351–359. 10.1098/rspb.2001.1904 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. LeBas, N. R. , & Marshall, N. J. (2000). The role of colour in signalling and male choice in the agamid lizard Ctenophorus ornatus . Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 267, 445–452. 10.1098/rspb.2000.1020 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Lebas, N. R. , & Marshall, N. J. (2001). No evidence of female choice for a condition‐dependent trait in the agamid lizard, Ctenophorus ornatus . Behaviour, 138, 965–980. 10.1163/156853901753286515 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  53. Levine, J. , & MacNichol, E. J. (1979). Visual pigments in teleost fishes: Effects of habitat, microhabitat, and behavior on visual system evolution. Sensory Processes, 3, 95–131. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Lind, O. , Henze, M. J. , Kelber, A. , & Osorio, D. (2017). Coevolution of coloration and colour vision? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 372, 20160338 10.1098/rstb.2016.0338 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Loew, E. R. , Fleishman, L. J. , Foster, R. G. , & Provencio, I. (2002). Visual pigments and oil droplets in diurnal lizards: A comparative study of Caribbean anoles. The Journal of Experimental Biology, 205, 927–938. 10.1111/j.1601-5223.1977.tb00956.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. López, P. , & Martín, J. (2001). Pheromonal recognition of females takes precedence over the chromatic cue in male Iberian wall lizards Podarcis hispanica . Ethology, 107, 901–912. 10.1046/j.1439-0310.2001.00724.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  57. López, P. , Martín, J. , & Cuadrado, M. (2002). Pheromone‐mediated intrasexual aggression in male lizards, Podarcis hispanicus . Aggressive Behavior, 28, 154–163. 10.1002/ab.90017 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Macedonia, J. M. (2001). Habitat light, colour variation, and ultraviolet reflectance in the Grand Cayman anole, Anolis conspersus . Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 73, 299–320. 10.1006/bijl.2001.0545 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Marshall, K. L. A. , Philpot, K. E. , & Stevens, M. (2016). Microhabitat choice in island lizards enhances camouflage against avian predators. Scientific Reports, 6, 19815 10.1038/srep19815 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. McLean, C. A. , Moussalli, A. , & Stuart‐Fox, D. (2014). Local adaptation and divergence in colour signal conspicuousness between monomorphic and polymorphic lineages in a lizard. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 27, 2654–2664. 10.1111/jeb.12521 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. McLean, C. A. , Stuart‐Fox, D. , & Moussalli, A. (2014). Phylogeographic structure, demographic history and morph composition in a colour polymorphic lizard. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 27, 2123–2137. 10.1111/jeb.12464 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Miyagi, R. , Terai, Y. , Aibara, M. , Sugawara, T. , Imai, H. , Tachida, H. , … Okada, N. (2012). Correlation between nuptial colors and visual sensitivities tuned by opsins leads to species richness in sympatric Lake Victoria cichlid fishes. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 29, 3281–3296. 10.1093/molbev/mss139 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Nafus, M. G. , Germano, J. M. , Perry, J. A. , Todd, B. D. , Walsh, A. , & Swaisgood, R. R. (2015). Hiding in plain sight: A study on camouflage and habitat selection in a slow‐moving desert herbivore. Behavioral Ecology, 26, 1389–1394. 10.1093/beheco/arv096 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  64. Olsson, M. , & Madsen, T. (1995). Female choice on male quantitative traits in lizards ‐ Why is it so rare? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 36, 179–184. 10.1007/BF00177794 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  65. Osborne, L. , Umbers, K. D. L. , Backwell, P. R. Y. , & Keogh, J. S. (2012). Male tawny dragons use throat patterns to recognize rivals. Naturwissenschaften, 99, 869–872. 10.1007/s00114-012-0968-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Provencio, I. , Loew, E. R. , & Foster, R. G. (1992). Vitamin A2‐based visual pigments in fully terrestrial vertebrates. Vision Research, 32, 2201–2208. 10.1016/0042-6989(92)90084-V [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. R Core Team (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; http://www.R-project.org/ [Google Scholar]
  68. Seehausen, O. , Terai, Y. , Magalhaes, I. , Carleton, K. , Mrosso, H. , Miyagi, R. , … Okada, N. (2008). Speciation through sensory drive in cichlid fish. Nature, 455, 620–627. 10.1038/nature07285 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Shand, J. , Archer, M. A. , & Collin, S. P. (1999). Ontogenetic changes in the retinal photoreceptor mosaic in a fish, the black bream, Acanthopagrus butcheri . The Journal of Comparative Neurology, 412, 203–217. 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9861(19990920)412:2<203:AID-CNE2>3.0.CO;2-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Shand, J. , Davies, W. L. , Thomas, N. , Balmer, L. , Cowing, J. A. , Pointer, M. , … Hunt, D. M. (2008). The influence of ontogeny and light environment on the expression of visual pigment opsins in the retina of the black bream, Acanthopagrus butcheri . Journal of Experimental Biology, 211, 1495–1503. 10.1242/jeb.012047 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Shand, J. , Hart, N. S. , Thomas, N. , & Partridge, J. C. (2002). Developmental changes in the cone visual pigments of black bream Acanthopagrus butcheri . Journal of Experimental Biology, 205, 3661–3667. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Sicsú, P. , Manica, L. T. , Maia, R. , & Macedo, R. H. (2013). Here comes the sun: Multimodal displays are associated with sunlight incidence. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 67, 1633–1642. 10.1007/s00265-013-1574-x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  73. Simon, V. B. (2011). Communication signal rates predict interaction outcome in the brown anole lizard, Anolis sagrei . Copeia, 2011, 38–45. 10.1643/CE-08-022 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  74. Sison‐Mangus, M. P. (2006). Beauty in the eye of the beholder: The two blue opsins of lycaenid butterflies and the opsin gene‐driven evolution of sexually dimorphic eyes. Journal of Experimental Biology, 209, 3079–3090. 10.1242/jeb.02360 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Slater, G. S. C. , & Birney, E. (2005). Automated generation of heuristics for biological sequence comparison. BMC Bioinformatics, 6, 1–11. 10.1186/1471-2105-6-31 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Smith, J. M. , & Zucker, N. (1997). Do female tree lizards, Urosaurus ornatus, exhibit mate choice? Journal of Herpetology, 31, 179–186. 10.2307/1565385 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  77. Stamps, J. A. , & Krishnan, V. (1997). Functions of fights in territory establishment. The American Naturalist, 150, 393–405. 10.1086/286071 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Stuart‐Fox, D. , & Goode, J. L. (2014). Female ornamentation influences male courtship investment in a lizard. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 2, 1–9. 10.3389/fevo.2014.00002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  79. Stuart‐Fox, D. M. , & Johnston, G. R. (2005). Experience overrides colour in lizard contests. Behaviour, 142, 329–350. 10.1163/1568539053778265 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  80. Teasdale, L. C. , Stevens, M. , & Stuart‐Fox, D. (2013). Discrete colour polymorphism in the tawny dragon lizard (Ctenophorus decresii) and differences in signal conspicuousness among morphs. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 26, 1035–1046. 10.1111/jeb.12115 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Théry, M. , & Gomez, D. (2010). Insect colours and visual appearance in the eyes of their predators In Casas J. & Stephen J. S. (Eds.), Advances in insect physiology (1st ed.). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd; 10.1016/S0065-2806(10)38001-5 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  82. Tokarz, R. R. (1995). Mate choice in lizards: A review. Herpetological Monographs, 9, 17–40. 10.2307/1466994 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  83. Tokarz, R. R. (1998). Mating pattern in the lizard Anolis sagrei: Implications for mate choice and sperm competition. Herpetologica, 54, 388–394. [Google Scholar]
  84. Tseng, W. , Lin, J.‐W. , Lou, C. , Lee, K.‐H. , Wu, L. , Wang, T.‐Y. , … Lin, S.‐M. (2018). Opsin gene expression regulated by testosterone level in a sexually dimorphic lizard. Scientific Reports, 8, 16055 10.1038/s41598-018-34284-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. Untergasser, A. , Cutcutache, I. , Koressaar, T. , Ye, J. , Faircloth, B. C. , Remm, M. , & Rozen, S. G. (2012). Primer3 — New capabilities and interfaces. Nucleic Acids Research, 40, 1–12. 10.1093/nar/gks596 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Uy, J. A. C. , & Endler, J. A. (2004). Modification of the visual background increases the conspicuousness of golden‐collared manakin displays. Behavioral Ecology, 15, 1003–1010. 10.1093/beheco/arh106 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  87. Whiting, M. J. , Webb, J. K. , & Keogh, J. S. (2009). Flat lizard female mimics use sexual deception in visual but not chemical signals. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 276, 1585–1591. 10.1098/rspb.2008.1822 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  88. Yewers, M. S. , McLean, C. A. , Moussalli, A. , Stuart‐Fox, D. , Bennett, A. T. D. , & Knott, B. (2015). Spectral sensitivity of cone photoreceptors and opsin expression in two colour‐divergent lineages of the lizard Ctenophorus decresii . Journal of Experimental Biology, 218, 2979–2979. 10.1242/jeb.131854 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The dataset and R code are available from Dryad: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.0fg8g9h

Articles from Ecology and Evolution are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES