  The Turing pattern model is one type of reaction-diffusion (RD) model. The
first identification of pattern formation by the Turing pattern model in an
actual animal was made in the 1990s with the observation of patterns in the sea
anemone. But can we assume that all epidermal patterns in animals can be
explained by the Turing pattern model? Even for fish, there are some fish that
are clearly not Turing patterns, differing significantly from the patterns that
can be generated by RD models. For example, the body pattern of the ornamental
carp Nishiki goi produced in Japan varies randomly from individual to
individual, and it is difficult to predict the pattern of the offspring from
that of the parent fish. A model in which these fish patterns are formed
randomly is the majority voting model. From this, it can be inferred that the
epidermal pattern of fish can be explained by either the Turing pattern model
or the majority voting model. But how do fish use these two different models?
It is hard to imagine that completely different epidermal formation mechanisms
are used among species of the same family. For this reason, there may be a more
basic model that can produce patterns for either model. In this study, the
Turing pattern model and the majority voting model were represented by cellular
automata, and then a new model integrating these two models was proposed. By
adjusting the parameters, this integrated model was able to create patterns
that are equivalent to both the Turing pattern model and the majority voting
model. By setting the intermediate parameters values of these two models, it
was possible to create a variety of patterns that were more diverse than those
created by each single model. Although this model is simpler than previously
proposed models, it was able to confirm that it can create a variety of
patterns.
