Genetic colour variation visible for predators and conspecifics is concealed from humans in a polymorphic moth

• Published in: Journal of evolutionary biology Vol. 35; no. 3; pp. 467 - 478
• Main Authors: Nokelainen, Ossi, Galarza, Juan A., Kirvesoja, Jimi, Suisto, Kaisa, Mappes, Johanna
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.03.2022; John Wiley and Sons Inc
• Subjects: Algorithms; Animals; aposematism; Arctia plantaginis; Butterflies & moths; Color; Conspecifics; Discriminant analysis; Eye (anatomy); Female; Gene polymorphism; Genetic diversity; Genetic variance; Genotypes; Heredity; Humans; Machine learning; Male; Males; Moths - genetics; multispectral imaging; Perception; Phenotype; Phenotypes; Pigmentation - genetics; Polymorphism; Polymorphism, Genetic; Predators; Receivers; Vision; wood tiger moth; multispectral imaging; aposematism; polymorphism; discriminant analysis; wood tiger moth; Arctia plantaginis
• ISSN: 1010-061X; 1420-9101
• DOI: 10.1111/jeb.13994

The definition of colour polymorphism is intuitive: genetic variants express discretely coloured phenotypes. This classification is, however, elusive as humans form subjective categories or ignore differences that cannot be seen by human eyes. We demonstrate an example of a ‘cryptic morph’ in a polymorphic wood tiger moth (Arctia plantaginis), a phenomenon that may be common among well‐studied species. We used pedigree data from nearly 20,000 individuals to infer the inheritance of hindwing colouration. The evidence supports a single Mendelian locus with two alleles in males: WW and Wy produce the white and yy the yellow hindwing colour. The inheritance could not be resolved in females as their hindwing colour varies continuously with no clear link with male genotypes. Next, we investigated if the male genotype can be predicted from their phenotype by machine learning algorithms and by human observers. Linear discriminant analysis grouped male genotypes with 97% accuracy, whereas humans could only group the yy genotype. Using vision modelling, we also tested whether the genotypes have differential discriminability to humans, moth conspecifics and their bird predators. The human perception was poor separating the genotypes, but avian and moth vision models with ultraviolet sensitivity could separate white WW and Wy males. We emphasize the importance of objective methodology when studying colour polymorphism. Our findings indicate that by‐eye categorization methods may be problematic, because humans fail to see differences that can be visible for relevant receivers. Ultimately, receivers equipped with different perception than ours may impose selection to morphs hidden from human sight. The definition of colour polymorphism is intuitive: genetic variants express discretely‐coloured phenotypes. We show that genetic colour variation visible for predators and conspecifics is concealed from humans in the polymorphic wood tiger moth. Here, human visible colour variation (a white male, a yellow male and an orange female from top to bottom) is depicted.