Open the tool

How does the great horned owl see?

The great horned owl (Bubo virginianus) is a bird in the order Strigiformes. Its eyes belong to the vision type Owl and night bird: tubular forward eyes (owls) or tiny eyes (kiwi), rod-dominated, low acuity, fixed eyes.

Measured in this species: colour, sharpness, field of view, night vision and motion (flicker fusion). Measured core: measured values on at least 3 of the 6 dials. Every value below carries its evidence level and sources; nothing is typed by hand.

Sample scene drawn in code: a face with red lips, a green shirt, red and green apples, flowers and a colour strip, as a person sees it.
The sample scene as a person sees it.
The same sample scene rendered by the See Like Animals engine for the great horned owl's eyes, using the values in the table below.
The same scene rendered for the great horned owl (60° field of view, daylight).
See your photo as the great horned owlThis 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 horned owl (Bubo virginianus), catalogue-v1
DialValueEvidenceSources
ColourColour receptors
4 receptor classes: 373 nm (UVS), 454 nm (SWS (blue)), 504 nm (MWS (green)), 555 nm (LWS (long))
measured in this species
Measured[1][2][3]
Ultraviolet
yes: at least one receptor peaks in the ultraviolet		Measured
SharpnessAcuity
7.125 cycles per degree
median of 2 behavioural rows (method priority rule)
Measured (not re-verified)[4][5]
Field of viewBinocular overlap
41°
median of 1 rows (eyes-at-rest rows preferred)
Measured[6]
Total field of view
201°
median species-v1 total field of family Strigidae: Strix aluco
Estimated[7]
Blind area behind the head
159°		Estimated[7]
Eye placement
lateral
frontal if binocular overlap >= 60 deg, else lateral
Derived[6]
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
nocturnal
mode of 5 rows (of 5 rows): diurnal; nocturnal
Measured (not re-verified)[11][12][13][2][14]
Reflective layer (tapetum)
no		Measured (not re-verified)[15]
Rods vs cones
rod-dominated
nocturnal -> rod-dominated; crepuscular / cathemeral / mixed -> mixed; diurnal -> cone-dominated
Derived[11][12][13][2][14]
Motion (flicker fusion)Flicker fusion frequency
40 Hz
median of 1 bright-light rows (behavioural/whole-eye ERG rows; all rows: [40.0]); cff_hz: dim-light rows (bright-light rows used) set aside (labelled alternative: 45)
Measured[16]

Comparisons

Related animals

More birds: all birds with measured vision data.

Sources

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. Caves EM, Brandley NC, Johnsen S (2018) Visual acuity and the evolution of signals. Trends Ecol Evol 33:358-372. Supplementary Tables S1-S3.. doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2018.03.001
  5. Potier S, Mitkus M, Kelber A (2020) Visual adaptations of diurnal and nocturnal raptors. Semin Cell Dev Biol 106:156-164. Table 1.. doi.org/10.1016/j.semcdb.2020.05.004
  6. Potier S, Roulin A, Martin GR, Portugal SJ, Bonhomme V, Bouchet T, de Romans R, Meyrier E, Kelber A. 2023. Binocular field configuration in owls: the role of foraging ecology. Proc R Soc B 290: 20230664. Data figshare.. doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2023.0664
  7. species_v1:Martin 1984
  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. Choiniere JN, Neenan JM, Schmitz L, Ford DP, Chapelle KEJ, Balanoff AM, Sipla JS, Georgi JA, Walsh SA, Norell MA, Xu X, Clark JM, Benson RBJ. 2021. Evolution of vision and hearing modalities in theropod dinosaurs. Science 372:610-613. doi:10.1126/science.abe7941. Data: https://osf.io/teq73/. doi.org/10.1126/science.abe7941
  13. 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
  14. 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
  15. species_v1:Healy et al. 2013
  16. 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
  17. 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
  18. 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

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