Open the tool

How does the great crested grebe see?

The great crested grebe (Podiceps cristatus) is a bird in the order Podicipediformes. Its eyes belong to the vision type Panoramic grain-eater and wader.

Measured in this species: field of view and night vision. One measured dial: a value other than colour or sharpness is measured in this species; colour and sharpness are not measured here. Every value below carries its evidence level and sources; nothing is typed by hand.

See your photo as the great crested grebeThis species is part of the full catalogue in the tool (full unlock). Your photo stays on your device.

What stands out

The six dials

Evidence levels: how the tiers work. "Measured" means a value measured in this species; "Estimated" values come from a close relative or an eye-size formula.

Vision values for the great crested grebe (Podiceps cristatus), catalogue-v1
DialValueEvidenceSources
ColourColour receptors
2 receptor classes: 404 nm (VS/SWS (violet)), 503 nm (MWS (green))
ESTIMATE: receptor classes from opsin-gene presence in this species; lambda max per class from the measured class template of the nearest taxon (never from the gene itself)
Group default[1][2][3][4]
SharpnessAcuity
14.23 cycles per degree
allometry (Aves): log10(acuity_cpd) = intercept + slope * log10(eye_axial_length_mm); slope 0.9017, intercept 0.1397, R2 0.453, n 99 (fitted in this script; fitted range [4.36, 39.81] mm); eye_axial_length_mm 13.3 mm
Estimated[5][6]
Field of viewBinocular overlap
24°
median of 1 rows (eyes-at-rest rows preferred)
Measured (not re-verified)[7]
Total field of view
310°
measured total field
Measured (not re-verified)[7]
Sharp zones (foveas)Number of foveas
1
median of 48 relatives in class Aves: Branta canadensis, Cardinalis cardinalis, Passerina cyanea, Zenaida macroura, Cyanocitta cristata, Junco hyemalis
Group default[8][9][10]
Fovea type
single central fovea (displaced dorso-temporally from retinal centre)		Group default[8][9][10]
Night visionActivity pattern
diurnal
mode of 3 rows (of 3 rows): diurnal; not_nocturnal
Measured (not re-verified)[11][12][13]
Rods vs cones
cone-dominated
nocturnal -> rod-dominated; crepuscular / cathemeral / mixed -> mixed; diurnal -> cone-dominated
Derived[11][12][13]
Motion (flicker fusion)Flicker fusion frequency
88.5 Hz
median of 17 relatives in class Aves: Bubo virginianus, Melopsittacus undulatus, Passer domesticus, Taeniopygia guttata, Columba livia, Calypte anna
Group default[14][15][16][17][18]

Related animals

More birds: all birds with measured vision data.

Sources

  1. Borges R, Khan I, Johnson WE, Gilbert MTP, Zhang G, Jarvis ED, O'Brien SJ, Antunes A (2015) Gene loss, adaptive evolution and the co-evolution of plumage coloration genes with opsins in birds. BMC Genomics 16:751
  2. Lind O, Mitkus M, Olsson P, Kelber A. 2014. Ultraviolet vision in birds: the importance of transparent eye media. Proc R Soc B 281:20132209. Table 1. doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.2209
  3. Longcore T. 2023. A compendium of photopigment peak sensitivities and visual spectral response curves of terrestrial wildlife to guide design of outdoor nighttime lighting. Basic Appl Ecol 73:40-50. doi:10.1016/j.baae.2023.09.002. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8432720
  4. VPOD in-vivo (MSP / single-cell) lambda max compendium, file scp_cleaned.csv, VPOD GitHub (Frazer et al. 2025 bioRxiv 10.1101/2025.08.22.671864). github.com/VisualPhysiologyDB/visual-physiology-opsin-db/tree/main/scripts_n_notebooks/vpod_ML_workflows/mine_n_match/data_sources/lmax/vpod
  5. Ausprey I.J. & Ritland S. 2024. Eye morphology contributes to the ecology and evolution of the avian tree of life [Dataset]. Dryad. Digitised Table 7 of Ritland S. 1982, The allometry of the vertebrate eye, PhD dissertation, University of Chicago. Paper: Ausprey 2024 J Anim Ecol doi:10.1111/1365-2656.14141. doi.org/10.5061/dryad.3xsj3txq7
  6. Olsson P, Lind O, Mitkus M, Delhey K, Kelber A. 2021. Lens and cornea limit UV vision of birds - a phylogenetic perspective. J Exp Biol 224:jeb243129. doi.org/10.1242/jeb.243129
  7. Pecsics T, Csorgo T. 2023. Ornis Hungarica 31(2):110-124. doi.org/10.2478/orhu-2023-0023
  8. Moore BA, Tyrrell LP, Pita D, Bininda-Emonds ORP, Fernandez-Juricic E 2017. Does retinal configuration make the head and eyes of foveate birds move? Sci Rep 7: 38406. Appendix 1.. doi.org/10.1038/srep38406
  9. Potier S, Mitkus M, Bonadonna F, Duriez O, Isard P-F, Dulaurent T, Mentek M, Kelber A 2017. Eye size, fovea, and foraging ecology in accipitriform raptors. Brain Behav Evol 90: 232-242. Supplementary material (Tables S1, S2).. doi.org/10.1159/000479783
  10. Rodrigues T, Matter MM, Chiodini A, et al. 2026. Foveal vision in fast-flying birds hunting on the wing. bioRxiv 2026.06.05.730304. doi.org/10.64898/2026.06.05.730304
  11. Light conditions and the evolution of the visual system in birds (figshare dataset, SupplementaryDataset1). doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.22116371.v3
  12. Wilman H, Belmaker J, Simpson J, de la Rosa C, Rivadeneira MM, Jetz W. 2014. EltonTraits 1.0: species-level foraging attributes of the world's birds and mammals. Ecology 95:2027. BirdFuncDat.txt. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3559887.v1
  13. Moura et al. 2024. A phylogeny-informed characterisation of global tetrapod traits addresses data gaps and biases. PLoS Biol 22:e3002658. TetrapodTraits v3.0.1.. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22536349
  14. Boström JE, Dimitrova M, Canton C, Håstad O, Qvarnström A, Ödeen A. 2016. Ultra-rapid vision in birds. PLoS ONE 11(3): e0151099. S1 Table. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151099
  15. Haarlem CS, Hynes C, Jackson AL, Mitchell KJ, O'Connell RG, Healy K. 2026. Pace of ecology drives the tempo of visual perception across the animal kingdom. Nature Ecology & Evolution (doi:10.1038/s41559-026-02994-7). Figshare dataset 10.6084/m9.figshare.30556475. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30556475
  16. Healy K, McNally L, Ruxton GD, Cooper N, Jackson AL. 2013. Metabolic rate and body size are linked with perception of temporal information. Animal Behaviour 86:685-696. Table 1. doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.06.018
  17. Inger R, Bennie J, Davies TW, Gaston KJ. 2014. Potential biological and ecological effects of flickering artificial light. PLoS ONE 9(5): e98631. Table 3. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098631
  18. Lafitte A, Sordello R, Legrand M, Nicolas V, Obein G, Reyjol Y. 2022. A flashing light may not be that flashy: A systematic review on critical fusion frequencies. PLoS ONE 17(12): e0279718. S10 File (CFF database). doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279718

Every value cites its sources (all sources). Data: catalogue-v1, built 2026-09-29. Accuracy notes: how accurate is this?