The other day I was listening to Radiolab in my car (if you don’t know this program, give them a listen), and the topic of the episode was our perception of colors. I was struck by the statement that the color blue is exceptionally rare in nature and, as a consequence, philologists claim, this is the last color to enter human vocabulary in the course of the evolution of individual languages. This is simply because we rarely need (or needed, historically speaking) to describe things that are blue. I always knew that blue was relatively rare among terrestrial animals, albeit examples of blue species can be found in nearly every major group, and decided to see if the pattern of rarity of blueness is reflected in my photos.
I used the program Picasa, which allows you to filter images by their color information, to do a search for images with blue as the predominant color. I scanned only about 15,000 of my images, but they represented different geographic regions and groups of animals, and thus were representative of my entire image collection. Naturally, I got a lot of hits with blue sky or water, but also a few photos showing blue animals. The most surprising thing was that nearly all blue animals were from the New World: morpho butterflies, Coprophaneus dung beetles, blue crabs (Callinectes), and poison arrow frogs, to name a few. The only non-American species that came up in the search was a Japanese mud crab Ilyoplax pusillus.
Now, there are many animals in Europe, Africa, and Asia with blue colors (lycaenid butterflies, blue-winged Oedipoda grasshoppers, Blue Tits and other birds etc.), but I cannot think of anything that rivals North American bluebirds or morphos. This makes me wonder if the evolution of color classification schemes in human languages that was mentioned in the Radiolab program might have been different among Amerindian tribes that are routinely exposed to blue animals. The only examples of languages that lacked a specific word for blue came from Africa, and the historical examples of languages that coined this word late in their evolution came from Europe. I need to read up on this.
13 Comments Add yours
Dear Dr. Piotr,
I love your blog, about this post I have some interesting fact, now I live at Ecuador, and here in the Amazonia, Dr. Richard Evans Schultes described a tribe whom were not able to distinguish blue from green. Here you have a link to the page where you could find this information in the Wade Davis’s book “One River” http://books.google.com.ec/books?id=BZhaEjSxQ8kC&q=color&source=gbs_word_cloud_r&cad=5#v=snippet&q=color&f=false
These photos are stunning, beautiful subjects. :)
Reblogged this on Animal Lovers' Blog.
“I was struck by the statement that the color blue is exceptionally rare in nature…”
In nature or just on animals? There are lots of blue berries and blue flowers. and when it comes to animals, blue on butterflies and dragonflies/damselflies is common enough.
Hi, that is true I just have a few photos http://www.flickr.com/photos/28347466@N08/7722114444/in/photostream
I have a blog post of blue insect photographs (not as great as yours), but I wanted to share it with you after reading your blog.
I have a blog post with photographs of blue insects. Reading your blog reminded me of it.
another blue crab, from Christmas Island, http://rmbr.nus.edu.sg/rbz/biblio/60/60rbz089-100.pdf
The “newness” of “blueness” in the language is a very intriguing idea; I wonder how it relates to the meaning of blue = sadl…nice shots btw… :)
Blue certainly is quite rare! I have very few images with blue critters also. In the ocean it does not seem so rare though.