Abstract
THE interesting article in NATURE of October 11, p. 428, by Dr. Hans Kalmus requires comment upon a number of points, but first a protest must be entered against the use of the word ‘frequently’ in evidence for a ‘rule’. Other vague statements might well be given more precise definition, such as ‘pale’ or ‘dark’. The complications of pattern introduce great difficulties: Is an insect (non–lepidopterous, to fall in with Dr. Kalmus's excision of this group from most of the argument) with strongly contrasted areas of dark and light, conforming to the type of disruptive procryptic, or of aposematic, coloration, to be considered ‘dark’ or ‘pale’? Dr. Kalmus's criteria would seem to be applicable only to unicolorous examples, or those of which the pattern gives a fairly uniform result, and thus must exclude immense numbers of insects.
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
CARPENTER, G. Physiology and Ecology of Cuticle Colour in Insects. Nature 148, 693 (1941). https://doi.org/10.1038/148693a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/148693a0
This article is cited by
-
Properties of Cuticle and Insect Ecology
Nature (1942)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.