Abstract
Previous comparative research has attributed interspecific variation in eye size among mammals to selection related to visual acuity. Mammalian species have also been hypothesized to differ in visual acuity partly as a result of differences in ecology. While a number of prior studies have explored ecological and phylogenetic effects on eye shape, a broad comparative analysis of the relationships between visual acuity, eye size and ecology in mammals is currently lacking. Here we use phylogenetic comparative methods to explore these relationships in a taxonomically and ecologically diverse sample of 91 mammal species. These data confirm that axial eye length and visual acuity are significantly positively correlated in mammals. This relationship conforms to expectations based on theoretical optics and prior analyses of smaller comparative samples. Our data also demonstrate that higher visual acuity in mammals is associated with: (1) diurnality and (2) predatory habits once the effects of eye size and phylogeny have been statistically controlled. These results suggest that interspecific variation in mammalian visual acuity is the result of a complex interplay between phylogenetic history, visual anatomy and ecology.
Journal Section:
Editor's choice
Keywords:
Vision,
Eye axial diameter,
Primate,
Visual resolution,
Mammals,
Sensory ecology,
Locomotion,
Diet
References
1.
Arrese C, Archer M, Beazley LD (2002): Visual capabilities in a crepuscular marsupial, the honey possum (Tarsipes rostratus): a visual approach to ecology. J Zool 256:151-158.
2.
Arrese C, Archer M, Runham P, Dunlop SA, Beazley LD (2000): Visual system in a diurnal marsupial, the numbat (Myrmecobius fasciatus): retinal organization, visual acuity and visual fields. Brain Behav Evol 55:163-175.
[PubMed]
3.
Arrese C, Dunlop SA, Harman AM, Braekevelt CR, Ross WM, Shand J, Beazley LD (1999): Retinal structure and visual acuity in a polyprotodont marsupial, the fat-tailed dunnart (Sminthopsis crassicaudata). Brain Behav Evol 53:111-126.
[PubMed]
4.
Bininda-Emonds ORP, Cardillo M, Jones KE, MacPhee RDE, Beck RMD, Grenyer R, Price SA, Vos RA, Gittleman JL, Purvis A (2007): The delayed rise of present-day mammals. Nature 446:507-512.
[PubMed]
5.
Burnham KP, Anderson DR, Huyvaert KP (2011): AIC model selection and multimodel inference in behavioral ecology: some background, observations, and comparisons. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:23-35.
6.
Diamond ME, von Heimendahl M, Knutsen PM, Kleinfeld D, Ahissar E (2008): ‘Where' and ‘what' in the whisker sensorimotor system. Nature Rev Neurosci 9:601-612.
[PubMed]
7.
Freckleton RP, Harvey PH, Pagel M (2002): Phylogenetic analysis and comparative data: a test and review of evidence. Am Nat 160:712-726.
[PubMed]
8.
Garamszegi LZ, Møller AP, Erritzøe J (2002): Coevolving avian eye size and brain size in relation to prey capture and nocturnality. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:961-967.
[PubMed]
9.
Garland T (1983): The relation between maximal running speed and body mass in terrestrial mammals. J Zool 199:157-170.
10.
Garland T, Ives AR (2000): Using the past to predict the present: confidence intervals for regression equations in phylogenetic comparative methods. Am Nat 155:346-364.
[PubMed]
11.
Hall MI, Heesy CP (2011): Eye size, flight speed, and Leuckert's law in birds. J Zool 283:291-297.
12.
Hall MI, Kamilar J, Kirk EC (2012): Eye shape and the nocturnal bottleneck of mammals. Proc R Soc Lond B 279:4962-4968.
[PubMed]
13.
Harmon LJ, Weir JT, Brock CD, Glor RE, Challenger W (2008): GEIGER: investigating evolutionary radiations. Bioinformatics 24:129-131.
[PubMed]
14.
Hayden S, Bekaert M, Crider TA, Mariani S, Murphy WJ, Teeling EC (2010): Ecological adaptation determines functional mammalian olfactory subgenomes. Genome Res 20:1-9.
[PubMed]
15.
Heard-Booth AN, Kirk EC (2012): The influence of maximum running speed on eye size: a test of Leuckart's Law in mammals. Anat Rec 295:1053-1062.
[PubMed]
16.
Heesy CP, Hall MI (2010): The nocturnal bottleneck and the evolution of mammalian vision. Brain Behav Evol 75:195-203.
[PubMed]
17.
Heesy CP (2008): Ecomorphology of orbit orientation and the adaptive significance of binocular vision in primates and other mammals. Brain Behav Evol 71:54-67.
[PubMed]
18.
Hughes A (1977): The topography of vision in mammals of contrasting lifestyle: comparative optics and retinal organisation; in Crescitelli F (ed): Handbook of Sensory Physiology vol 7. Berlin, Springer-Verlag, pp 613-756.
19.
Hutcheon JM, Kirsch JAW, Garland T (2002): A comparative analysis of brain size in relation to foraging ecology and phylogeny in the Chiroptera. Brain Behav Evol 60:165-180.
[PubMed]
20.
Jones KE, Purvis A (1997): An optimum body size for mammals? Comparative evidence from bats. Funct Ecol 11:751-756.
21.
Kay RF, Kirk EC (2000): Osteological evidence for the evolution of activity pattern and visual acuity in primates. Am J Phys Anthropol 113:235-262.
[PubMed]
22.
Kiltie RA (2000): Scaling of visual acuity with body size in mammals and birds. Funct Ecol 14:226-234.
23.
Kirk EC (2004): Comparative morphology of the eye in primates. Anat Rec A Discov Mol Cell Evol Biol 281A:1095-1103.
[PubMed]
24.
Kirk EC (2006a): Effects of activity pattern on eye size and orbital aperture size in primates. J Hum Evol 51:159-170.
[PubMed]
25.
Kirk EC (2006b): Eye morphology in cathemeral lemurids and other mammals. Folia Primatol 77:27-49.
[PubMed]
26.
Kirk EC, Kay RF (2004): The evolution of high visual acuity in the Anthropoidea; in Ross CF, Kay RF (eds): Anthropoid Origins: New Visions. New York, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, pp 539-602.
27.
Kirschfeld K (1976): The resolution of lens and compound eyes; in Zettler F, Weiler R (eds): Neural Principles in Vision. Berlin, Springer-Verlag, pp 354-370.
28.
Land MF, Nilsson D-E (2012): Animal Eyes, ed 2. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
29.
Lombardi L, Fernández N, Moreno S, Villafuerte R (2003): Habitat-related differences in rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) abundance, distribution, and activity. J Mammal 84:26-36.
30.
Niven JE, Laughlin SB (2008): Energy limitation as a selective pressure on the evolution of sensory systems. J Exp Biol 211:1792-1804.
[PubMed]
31.
Nowak RM (1999): Walker's Mammals of the World, ed 6. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press.
32.
Orme D, Freckleton R, Thomas G, Petzoldt T, Fritz S, Isaac N (2010): Caper: comparative analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R. R package version 0.4/r71. http://www.R-Forge.R-project.org/projects/caper/.
33.
Peichl L (2005): Diversity of mammalian photoreceptor properties: adaptations to habitat and lifestyle? Anat Rec A Discov Mol Cell Evol Biol 287A:1001-1012.
[PubMed]
34.
Peichl L, Rakotondraparany F, Kaiser A, Goodman SM, Kappeler PM (2004): Cone types and distributions in nocturnal and diurnal lemurs of Madagascar.Sydney, XVI International Congress of Eye Research.
35.
Pettigrew JD, Bhagwandin A, Haagensen M, Manger PR (2010): Visual acuity and heterogeneities of retinal ganglion cell densities and the tapetum lucidum of the African elephant (Loxodonta africana). Brain Behav Evol 75:251-261.
[PubMed]
36.
Pettigrew JD, Dreher B, Hopkins CS, McCall MJ, Brown M (1988): Peak density and distribution of ganglion cells in the retinae of microchiropteran bats: implications for visual acuity. Brain Behav Evol 32:39-56.
[PubMed]
37.
Protas M, Conrad M, Gross JB, Tabin C, Borowsky R (2007): Regressive evolution in the Mexican cave tetra, Astyanax mexicanus. Curr Biol 17:452-454.
[PubMed]
38.
R Development Core Team (2011): R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/.
39.
Ross CF (2000): Into the light: the origin of Anthropoidea. Annu Rev Anthropol 29:147-194.
40.
Ross CF, Kirk EC (2007): Evolution of eye size and shape in primates. J Hum Evol 52:294-313.
[PubMed]
41.
Schmidt M, Giessl A, Laufs T, Hankeln T, Wolfrum U, Burmester T (2003): How does the eye breathe? Evidence for neuroglobin-mediated oxygen supply in the mammalian retina. J Biol Chem 278:1932-1935.
[PubMed]
42.
Schmitz L (2009): Quantitative estimates of visual performance features in fossil birds. J Morphol 270:759-773.
[PubMed]
43.
Schnitzler H-U, Kalko EKV (2001): Echolocation by insect-eating bats. BioScience 51:557-569.
44.
Silveira LCL (2004): Comparative study of the primate retina; in Kaas JH, Collins CD (eds): The Primate Visual System. Boca Raton, CRC Press, pp 29-51.
45.
Symonds MRE, Moussalli A (2011): A brief guide to model selection, multimodel inference and model averaging in behavioural ecology using Akaike's information criterion. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:13-21.
46.
Tetreault N, Hakeem A, Allman JM (2004): The distribution and size of retinal ganglion cells in Microcebus murinus, Cheirogaleus medius, and Tarsius syrichta: implications for the evolution of sensory systems in primates; in Ross CF, Kay RF (eds): Anthropoid Origins: New Visions. New York, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, pp 463-475.
47.
Veilleux CC, Kirk EC (2009): Visual acuity in the cathemeral strepsirrhine Eulemur macaco flavifrons. Am J Primatol 71:343-352.
[PubMed]
48.
Veilleux CC, Lewis RJ (2011): Effects of habitat light intensity on mammalian eye shape. Anat Rec 294:905-914.
[PubMed]
49.
Walls GL (1942): The vertebrate eye and its adaptive radiation. Bloomfield Hills, The Cranbrook Press.
50.
Williams JB (1993): Field metabolism, water requirements, and foraging behavior of wild ostriches in the Namib. Ecology 74:390-404.
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
2014
You do not currently have access to this content.
