How does the hooded vulture see?

The hooded vulture (Necrosyrtes monachus) is a bird in the order Accipitriformes. Its eyes belong to the vision type Raptor telephoto: 4 cones (violet-sensitive), 2 foveas (deep central + temporal), the highest acuity measured, 35-50 deg binocular.

Measured in this species: field of view, foveas and night vision. 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 hooded vulture's eyes, using the values in the table below. — The same scene rendered for the hooded vulture (60° field of view, daylight).

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

What stands out

It has 4 colour receptor classes; people have 3.
Its sharpest vision resolves 84 cycles per degree: the finest stripe pattern it can tell apart from grey.
Its eyes cover about 277.5° around the head, with 43° seen by both eyes at once.
It stops seeing flicker at 77.7 Hz, against 60 Hz for people in this dataset, so fast motion looks about 1.3 times slower to it.^[14][15]
Activity pattern: diurnal.

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 hooded vulture (Necrosyrtes monachus), catalogue-v1
Dial	Value	Evidence	Sources
Colour	Colour receptors 4 receptor classes: 405 nm (VS/SWS (violet)), 449 nm (SWS (blue)), 504 nm (MWS (green)), 567 nm (LWS (long)) receptor set of nearest measured relative Buteo buteo (same family Accipitridae)	Estimated	^[1][2]
Sharpness	Acuity 84 cycles per degree median of 8 relatives in family Accipitridae: Aquila audax, Buteo jamaicensis, Gyps fulvus, Gyps indicus, Milvus migrans, Neophron percnopterus	Estimated	^[3][4][5]
Field of view	Binocular overlap 43° median of 1 rows (eyes-at-rest rows preferred)	Measured	^[6]
	Total field of view 277.5° median total field (measured, or 360 - blind area) of relatives in family Accipitridae: Accipiter cooperii, Buteo jamaicensis, Circaetus gallicus, Parabuteo unicinctus	Estimated	^[7]
	Blind area behind the head 82.5°	Estimated	^[7]
	Eye placement lateral frontal if binocular overlap >= 60 deg, else lateral	Derived	^[6]
Sharp zones (foveas)	Number of foveas 1 retinal topography	Measured (not re-verified)	^[8]
Sharp zones (foveas)	Fovea type deep central only	Measured (not re-verified)	^[8]
Night vision	Activity pattern diurnal mode of 4 rows (of 4 rows): diurnal; not_nocturnal	Measured (not re-verified)	^{[9][10][11][12]}
Night vision	Rods vs cones cone-dominated nocturnal -> rod-dominated; crepuscular / cathemeral / mixed -> mixed; diurnal -> cone-dominated	Derived	^{[9][10][11][12]}
Motion (flicker fusion)	Flicker fusion frequency 77.7 Hz median of 1 relatives in family Accipitridae: Parabuteo unicinctus	Estimated	^[13]

Related animals

Harris's hawk same vision type
Black kite same vision type
Egyptian vulture same vision type
Griffon vulture same vision type
Red-tailed hawk same vision type
Turkey vulture same vision type

More birds: all birds with measured vision data.

Sources

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
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
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
Caves EM, Fernandez-Juricic E, Kelley LA (2024) Ecological and morphological correlates of visual acuity in birds. J Exp Biol 227(2): jeb246063. Supplementary Table S1.. doi.org/10.1242/jeb.246063
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
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
Tyrrell LP, Moore BA, Loftis C, Fernandez-Juricic E 2017 (data 2017). The hawk-eyed songbird: retinal morphology, eye shape, and visual fields of an aerial insectivore. Am Nat 189(6). Dryad doi:10.5061/dryad.n7140.. doi.org/10.1086/691404
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
Anderson SR, Wiens JJ. 2017. Out of the dark: 350 million years of conservatism and evolution in diel activity patterns in vertebrates. Evolution 71:1944-1959. Dryad doi:10.5061/dryad.fg700. doi.org/10.5061/dryad.fg700
Light conditions and the evolution of the visual system in birds (figshare dataset, SupplementaryDataset1). doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.22116371.v3
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
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
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
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
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?