4.6 Article

The dual rod system of amphibians supports colour discrimination at the absolute visual threshold

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2016.0066

关键词

Bufo; Rana; photoreceptors; behaviour; visual threshold; colour vision

类别

资金

  1. Swedish Research Council
  2. K & A Wallenberg Foundation
  3. Ella & Georg Ehrnrooth Foundation
  4. Oskar Oflund Foundation
  5. Otto A. Malm Foundation
  6. Emil Aaltonen Foundation
  7. Academy of Finland [253314, 256156, 283268]
  8. Societas Scientiarum Fennica
  9. Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences [15-I-6-010]
  10. Academy of Finland (AKA) [256156, 253314, 253314, 256156, 283268, 283268] Funding Source: Academy of Finland (AKA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The presence of two spectrally different kinds of rod photoreceptors in amphibians has been hypothesized to enable purely rod-based colour vision at very low light levels. The hypothesis has never been properly tested, so we performed three behavioural experiments at different light intensities with toads (Bufo) and frogs (Rana) to determine the thresholds for colour discrimination. The thresholds of toads were different in mate choice and prey-catching tasks, suggesting that the differential sensitivities of different spectral cone types as well as task-specific factors set limits for the use of colour in these behavioural contexts. In neither task was there any indication of rod-based colour discrimination. By contrast, frogs performing phototactic jumping were able to distinguish blue from green light down to the absolute visual threshold, where vision relies only on rod signals. The remarkable sensitivity of this mechanism comparing signals from the two spectrally different rod types approaches theoretical limits set by photon fluctuations and intrinsic noise. Together, the results indicate that different pathways are involved in processing colour cues depending on the ecological relevance of this information for each task. This article is part of the themed issue 'Vision in dim light'.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据