Something I've been thinking about lately is how we think about camouflage with our chickens. A lot of people aim for plumage that matches the color of the environment exactly. This is still a very important consideration, but maybe not how people think. It's easy to forget, but no chicken predator sees the world the way we do. Most mammals are dichromats (only see two primary colors). Birds as a whole (including chickens and hawks) are tetrachromats (see 4 primary colors). Since there's no way for us to perceive the world the way that birds do, we can hardly guess at what camouflages a chicken from hawks, if it's even possible. However, there are ways to get a very rough idea of how a mammalian predator sees its environment. It's in no way perfect, but I found an app meant to simulate colorblindness in humans that gives an approximation of dichromatic vision. I'll show some examples of how it looks:
Here's a trio of youngsters at the in-laws place, who MIL has named the Three Stooges. From the human perspective, they have okay camouflage with this backdrop, but could be better. They have nice patterns that break up their silhouettes, but their deep red color is much more saturated than the greys of their surroundings.
View attachment 4212923
However, from a dichromatic perspective, it's totally different:
View attachment 4212926
They appear to blend in beautifully. Their rusty red patterns become a benefit rather than a hindrance. This puzzled me at first, though the reason should have been obvious. A more striking example would spell it out for me:
View attachment 4212939
I had this picture of a British standard araucana on my phone, so I decided to use it. She sticks out like a sore thumb on this lawn, right?
View attachment 4212943
Again, perfectly matched! (Though obviously, she has no cover to hide in)
The reason is, of course, because dichromats find red and green indistinguishable. Because of this, saturated red plumage matches excellently with deep green plants. This might mean that red from the mahogany gene is advantageous even if it doesn't match your soil, tree bark, or anything else, so long as there's green. That's certainly my takeaway. Either way, it appears that patterning and brightness levels are much more important to a chicken's camouflage than specific color. Noisy patterns that break up a chicken's shape should do well, even if the colors don't exactly match.
My hypothesis could definitely be off here though, especially considering that any simulation of dichromat vision is likely a little bit flawed.
I also have more examples I've saved if anyone wants to see, and I can also link the app I used so you can try it yourself
P.S. this is my first time using spoilers, I hope I did it righflock,
