…or is it an automatic, involuntary action of their cells?
Could a determined chamaeleon stay green on a brown background? Or an octopus stay bumpy when her background would suggest “smooth”?
I understand there are a number of different processes involved, so perhaps there’s not a simple yes or no answer.
It’s consciously controlled. When fighting for territory, or courting the opposite sex, octopi will take on vivid colors that have no resemblance to the background.
One wierd twist on this is the fact that octopi are color-blind. The complex color patterns that an octopus takes on, is actually just its best guess as to what the pattern would look like to an animal with color vision. I once saw an octopus put into a tank, whose bottom was painted in a pattern that would look drasticly different to black-and-white vision, vs. to color vision. The octopus changed colors to match the black-and-white pattern, making itself vividly visible to anyone with color vision.
The current consensus on chameleon color change is that it is due both to environmental factors (heat, light) and to emotional ones (aggression, fear, etc.). They do not change colors to match their backgrounds.
Octopuses, on the other hand, do change colors and patterns to match their backgrounds. However, they can also change color due to emotional factors.
Oh goody! Another octopus thread! (pulls up chair)
IIRC, this is also true of all the extant cephalopods, except the chambered nautilus. There is a marine biologist (can’t remember her name) who is doing research on a certain species of squid to determine if the color changing ability constitues a type of language. Fascinting little creatures, these most intelligent of invertebrates!
As a nit-pick, I might add that the correct plural of octopuses is either octopuses or octopodes (or octopods). “Octopi” is pseudo-Latin, and incorrect in real Latin. (It is, however, so common in English that it is accepted by some dictionaries.)
The fact that octopodes (thanks, Colibri) will take on colors that don’t resemble the background while under territorial protection stress or courting behavior doesn’t mean that the changes are “consciously controlled.” Such conditions would indicate that, in fact, the circumstances - call them emotional if you want - are certainly the types of situations that could evoke reflexive or innately determined behaviors or color changes. That a peacock fans out his feathers while courting doesn’t mean that he’s consciously controlling that behavior. I’d be careful to jump to that conclusion and that seems to be the real question that the OP is posing. And as to that question, I don’t know just how anyone would test it. How could one get a truly “determined” chameleon? I think you’re literally dealing with the reptilian brain there, and the concomitant nervous system. I think intentionality is a far-fetched concept with that life form. I know that octopodes are excellent problem solvers and it makes us think that there is some degree of intention and consciousness involved, but the examples provided don’t reveal it. xo, C.
Here is a video of an octopus changing colours.
This one has an octopus going from black and white to all black early on in it.
Without getting into the whole question of “conciousness” in reptiles or cephalopods. I think one can say, from the point of view of the OP, some color changes in both chameleons and octopuses are “voluntary” (as much as such things can be) rather than merely reflexive responses to the environment. Some color changes are used as signals to territorial rivals or potential mates, and thus depend on the mental state of the animal, rather than its mere physiological state (although hormones are also probably involved). If whether an animal chooses to respond with fight or flight in a given circumstance can be considered to be voluntary, then some color changes would fall into that category as well.
When I was an undergraduate, I did a study on Green Anoles (commonly called “chameleons” in the US). When they are cold they are brown, and when they warm up they usually turn green. In territorial interactions, the dominant individual will be green. An individual that loses a fight will turn brown and flee, signaling submission. I would consider both these reactions to be voluntary.
It may be an isolated case, but I’d like to bring up the behavior of the Mimic Octopus. This octopus takes the color changing to a new level - not only modifying color, but also modifying its shape to mimic known poisonous creatures like scorpion fish and sea snakes to further dissuage would-be predators.
In the case of the sea snake, not only does the octopus tuck all but two of it’s arms down into a hole - exposing the two elongated arms to resemble a sea snake, but it will also modify the coloring of those legs to be of the 1" alternating bands of dark and light type similar to sea snakes of that area.
This, to me, would be clear indication of “conscious” choice of color (and shape). (When it takes on the shape of the scorpion fish - when swimming - the patterns on the arms are of the spotted style like those on scorpion fish’s spines).
To clarlfy, by “'both these reactions” I meant fleeing and color change.
Right, I wasn’t looking for a debate on consciousness, just whether or not at least some animals (besides humans 
) have intentional control over their color and appearance.
How would you test it? I’m not sure. I don’t know how trainable chamaelons are - never struck me as particularly bright animals. But octopuses are, or so I hear. Has anyone trained an octopus to, say, flash a red octagon, or a blue triangle in exchange for a bit of fish? That would indicate to me a high level of “conscious” control over the process.
I’m afraid that’s the territory you bring us to, however. Your original question used the term “involuntary,” and then mbh invoked consciousness. I tried to reject the notion of conscious intention, and Colibri refined the discussion to bring up voluntary behavior, which makes a certain amount of sense to me. You’re back with intentional control. I don’t know how much of this discussion is semantics and how much is really a discussion of the brains and minds of beings and how they function. It’s complicated, and maybe I’m complicating it more than necessary. However, when you start asking how much input or choice a certain individual animal has in its appearance you’re getting into an area that seems to me to involve a certain degree of self-awareness and that is sort of close to consciousness. If nothing else, an animal needs to be aware of the effects of its behavior or its appearance on another being in order to make these choices. That seems to me to be a sort of consciousness. Or are these not choices? And if not, then aren’t they simply reflexes? I agree, however, that “choosing” to slink away from a fight is voluntary behavior. I don’t know about the color change, though.
Color change is also used by chameleons to communicate during reproductive behavior. I would certainly say they are aware of the effect these color changes might have on other individuals.
Again, I’m not really thinking that existentially.
I’m talking about the level at which it seems apparent that a dog can “consciously” choose to retrieve a ball or not. Is it a truly self-aware act? I don’t know. Is posting on a message board a truly self-aware act? There’s a GD topic. Sometimes the dog will chase and retrieve the ball, sometimes it will “choose” to sniff a tree instead. But a dog can be trained to retrieve a ball, and a trained dog will do it more often then not in response to positive reinforcement. He has some level of control over his legs and mouth - it’s not a simple reflex.
My eyes blink without me thinking about it. Yet I can “consciously choose” to control my blinking if I want. I’m still not clear whether or not a skin color change in an octopus is a similar thing. It seems like it’s not entirely involuntary, that is, a reflex, but I’m not clear how far that voluntary control extends. Do they arrange blobs of pigment with purpose, or is it as involuntary as the blobs of melanin on my skin?
From Colibri’s answers, it seems that there’s a continuum between “involuntary” (a sneeze) and “voluntary” (calculus). I’m just trying to suss out if anyone knows how far along that continuum these behaviors are. If they’re used for communication or aggression displays, then it sounds as if they’re at least as voluntary as men standing straight and putting their hands at their hips when confronting a jerk at a bar - maybe not something one plans out or thinks about, but could refrain from doing with some minimal effort.
Expert or not, I think Raxworthy is ascribing intentionality where it may not exist. If I become infuriated I may become pretty red myself. I do not intend to communicate anything by this redness. This sounds dangerously like those who suggest that birds sing so that they can attract a mate, a trope I imagine is familiar to Colibri. I don’t at all doubt that the colors communicate things. That the messages are sent intentionally is my question. I don’t see how it’s possible to separate the color changes that accompany certain behaviors from innate hormonal or neurological changes that are parts of those behaviors and to ascribe them to some level of individual intentionality. His examples are not convincing at all.
You’re getting into completely semantic issues now. Animals, at least vertebrates, are not little automatons responding blindly to external stimuli. I have no problem with the statement that birds sing in order to attract a mate (among other functions of song), nor with Raxworthy’s assessment of chameleon behavior.
You yourself said:
I don’t think there is much question that chameleons and octopuses are aware of the effect their behaviors, including color change, have on rivals or potential mates. While I would not use the same definition of conciousness that you do here, by this definition they are conscious.
You probably also raise your voice, glare, stand straighter and flex your arms so you look larger and more intimidating, and so forth. You are communicating your emotional state to your potential opponent, even if you may not be aware on a conscious level of what you are doing. (Color change in humans may communicate information about emotional state, but it is not an intrinsic part of the repertoire - in any case, most humans are too dark-skinned to become red when they get angry.) Since they are an intrinsic part of the communication repertoire of chameleons and octopuses, I would liken color changes to these kinds of behaviors. They are probably more analogous to a dog snarling or a rooster strutting than a simple change of physiological or hormonal state. If these latter behaviors can be considered “voluntary” in some sense, then color changes may be too.
I was vacationing in Southern California and decided to visit Baja. There we saw fishermen bringing in these weird squid creatures by the boatload, which turned out to be Humboldt Squid.
They would flash from dark maroon to snow white in the blink of an eye. The locals had a name for them (which I can’t recall) that refered to their cannablistic tendencies, and their lack of fear for humans.