The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Poison Frog Colors Are Honest Signals of Toxicity, Particularly for Bird Predators
Open accessAbstract
Antipredator defenses and warning signals typically evolve in concert. However, the extensive variation across taxa in both these components of predator deterrence and the relationship between them are poorly understood. Here we test whether there is a predictive relationship between visual conspicuousness and toxicity levels across 10 populations of the color-polymorphic strawberry poison frog, Dendrobates pumilio. Using a mouse-based toxicity assay, we find extreme variation in toxicity between frog populations. This variation is significantly positively correlated with frog coloration brightness, a viewer-independent measure of visual conspicuousness (i.e., total reflectance flux). We also examine conspicuousness from the view of three potential predator taxa, as well as conspecific frogs, using taxon-specific visual detection models and three natural background substrates. We find very strong positive relationships between frog toxicity and conspicuousness for bird-specific perceptual models. Weaker but still positive correlations are found for crab and D. pumilio conspecific visual perception, while frog coloration as viewed by snakes is not related to toxicity. These results suggest that poison frog colors can be honest signals of prey unpalatability to predators and that birds in particular may exert selection on aposematic signal design.
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.
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
Unrepeatable Repeatabilities: A Common Mistake
Lessells, C. M., & Boag, P. T. (1987) · The Auk · doi:10.2307/4087240 · Cited by 2,916
The Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History
Gratacap, L. P. (1907) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.25.629.99 · Cited by 1,249
Avoiding Attack: The Evolutionary Ecology of Crypsis, Warning Signals and Mimicry
Ruxton, G. D., Sherratt, T. N., & Speed, M. P. (2004) · Cited by 1,193
In search of the visual pigment template
GOVARDOVSKII, V. I., FYHRQUIST, N., REUTER, T., KUZMIN, D. G., & DONNER, K. (2000) · Visual Neuroscience · doi:10.1017/s0952523800174036 · Cited by 1,055
Tetrachromacy, oil droplets and bird plumage colours
Vorobyev, M., Osorio, D., Bennett, A. T. D., Marshall, N. J., & Cuthill, I. C. (1998) · Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology · doi:10.1007/s003590050286 · Cited by 739
Spaethe, J., Tautz, J., & Chittka, L. (2001) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.071053098 · Cited by 549
Siddiqi, A., Cronin, T. W., Loew, E. R., Vorobyev, M., & Summers, K. (2004) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.01047 · Cited by 544
Visual pigments and oil droplets from six classes of photoreceptor in the retinas of birds
Bowmaker, J. K., Heath, L. A., Wilkie, S. E., & Hunt, D. M. (1997) · Vision Research · doi:10.1016/s0042-6989(97)00026-6 · Cited by 488
Daly, J. W., Myers, C. W., & Whittaker, N. (1987) · Toxicon · doi:10.1016/0041-0101(87)90265-0 · Cited by 394
Cited by
Perceptual Biases and Mate Choice
Ryan, M. J., & Cummings, M. E. (2013) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110512-135901 · Cited by 284
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Maan, M. E., & Cummings, M. E.
- Venue
- The American Naturalist
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2012-01
- Volume
- 179
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- E1-E14
- ISSN
- 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5323
- OpenAlex
- W1980094530
- Cited by
- 260
- References
- 45
- FWCI
- 15.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Poison Frog Colors Are Honest Signals of Toxicity, Particularly for Bird Predators. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/663197
- The paper
- Maan, M. E., & Cummings, M. E. (2012). Poison Frog Colors Are Honest Signals of Toxicity, Particularly for Bird Predators. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/663197
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.