The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Imperfect transparency and camouflage in glass frogs
Abstract
Camouflage patterns prevent detection and/or recognition by matching the background, disrupting edges, or mimicking particular background features. In variable habitats, however, a single pattern cannot match all available sites all of the time, and efficacy may therefore be reduced. Active color change provides an alternative where coloration can be altered to match local conditions, but again efficacy may be limited by the speed of change and range of patterns available. Transparency, on the other hand, creates high-fidelity camouflage that changes instantaneously to match any substrate but is potentially compromised in terrestrial environments where image distortion may be more obvious than in water. Glass frogs are one example of terrestrial transparency and are well known for their transparent ventral skin through which their bones, intestines, and beating hearts can be seen. However, sparse dorsal pigmentation means that these frogs are better described as translucent. To investigate whether this imperfect transparency acts as camouflage, we used in situ behavioral trials, visual modeling, and laboratory psychophysics. We found that the perceived luminance of the frogs changed depending on the immediate background, lowering detectability and increasing survival when compared to opaque frogs. Moreover, this change was greatest for the legs, which surround the body at rest and create a diffuse transition from background to frog luminance rather than a sharp, highly salient edge. This passive change in luminance, without significant modification of hue, suggests a camouflage strategy, “edge diffusion,” distinct from both transparency and active color change.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This transparency is adaptive because it camouflages glassfrogs from predators while they sleep on vegetation during the day (17)”
From Glassfrogs conceal blood in their liver to maintain transparency (2022) · cites this paper as [17]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2025) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 352,181
Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01 · Cited by 86,835
Simultaneous Inference in General Parametric Models
Hothorn, T., Bretz, F., & Westfall, P. H. (2008) · Biometrical Journal · doi:10.1002/bimj.200810425 · Cited by 14,335
pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves
Robin, X., Turck, N., Hainard, A., Tiberti, N., Lisacek, F., Sanchez, J.-C., & Müller, M. (2011) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-12-77 · Cited by 13,697
Spectral sensitivity of the foveal cone photopigments between 400 and 500 nm
Smith, V. C., & Pokorny, J. (1975) · Vision Research · doi:10.1016/0042-6989(75)90203-5 · Cited by 1,318
Receptor noise as a determinant of colour thresholds
Vorobyev, M., & Osorio, D. (1998) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0302 · Cited by 1,298
Cuthill, I. C., Allen, W. L., Arbuckle, K., Caspers, B. A., Chaplin, G., Hauber, M. E., Hill, G. E., Jablonski, N. G., Jiggins, C. D., Kelber, A., et al. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aan0221 · Cited by 793
Self-citationUsing digital photography to study animal coloration
Stevens, M., Párraga, C. A., Cuthill, I. C., Partridge, J. C., & Troscianko, T. S. (2007) · Biological Journal of the Linnean Society · doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.2007.00725.x · Cited by 672
Self-citationDefining disruptive coloration and distinguishing its functions
Stevens, M., & Merilaita, S. (2008) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0216 · Cited by 366
Siddique, R. H., Gomard, G., & Hölscher, H. (2015) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms7909 · Cited by 329
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- C. Michalis “Background matching camouflage.” PhD thesis University of Bristol Bristol UK (2017).
Cited by
Glassfrogs conceal blood in their liver to maintain transparency
Taboada, C., Delia, J., Chen, M., Ma, C., Peng, X., Zhu, X., Jiang, L., Vu, T., Zhou, Q., Yao, J., et al. (2022) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abl6620 · Cited by 54
Metadata
- Authors
- Barnett, J. B., Michalis, C., Anderson, H. M., McEwen, B. L., Yeager, J., Pruitt, J. N., Scott-Samuel, N. E., & Cuthill, I. C.
- Affiliations
- Department of Psychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada;
- School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, BS8 1TQ Bristol, United Kingdom;
- Biodiversidad Medio Ambiente y Salud, Universidad de Las Américas, 170125 Quito, Ecuador;
- School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, BS8 1TU Bristol, United Kingdom
- ORCID
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Publisher
- National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2020-05-26
- Volume
- 117
- Issue
- 23
- Pages
- 12885-12890
- ISSN
- 0027-8424
- 1091-6490
- Cited by
- 37
- References
- 44
- Language
- en
- Funders
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (ANR-10-LABX-25-01)
- RCUK | Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/S00873X/1)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Imperfect transparency and camouflage in glass frogs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1919417117
- The paper
- Barnett, J. B., Michalis, C., Anderson, H. M., McEwen, B. L., Yeager, J., Pruitt, J. N., Scott-Samuel, N. E., & Cuthill, I. C. (2020). Imperfect transparency and camouflage in glass frogs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1919417117
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.