4.5 Article

Bird colour vision: behavioural thresholds reveal receptor noise

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY
卷 218, 期 2, 页码 184-193

出版社

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/jeb.111187

关键词

Animal behaviour; Bird vision; Gallus gallus; Psychophysics; Visual modelling

类别

资金

  1. Human Frontier Science Programme [RGP0017/2011]
  2. Swedish Research Council [621-2009-5683, 2012-2212, 637-2013-388]
  3. K A Wallenberg Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Birds have impressive physiological adaptations for colour vision, including tetrachromacy and coloured oil droplets, yet it is not clear exactly how well birds can discriminate the reflecting object colours that they encounter in nature. With behavioural experiments, we determined colour discrimination thresholds of chickens in bright and dim light. We performed the experiments with two colour series, orange and green, covering two parts of chicken colour space. These experiments allowed us to compare behavioural results with model expectations and determine how different noise types limit colour discrimination. At intensities ranging from bright light to those corresponding to early dusk (250-10 cd m(-2)), we describe thresholds accurately by assuming a constant signal-to-noise ratio, in agreement with an invariant Weber fraction of Weber's law. Below this intensity, signal-to-noise ratio decreases and Weber's law is violated because photon-shot noise limits colour discrimination. In very dim light (below 0.05cd m(-2) for the orange series or 0.2 cd m(-2) for the green series) colour discrimination is possibly constrained by dark noise, and the lowest intensity at which chickens can discriminate colours is 0.025 and 0.08 cd m(-2) for the orange and green series, respectively. Our results suggest that chickens use spatial pooling of cone outputs to mitigate photon-shot noise. Surprisingly, we found no difference between colour discrimination of chickens and humans tested with the same test in bright 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

4.5
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