See Like Animals Open the tool
Menu

How does the deep-sea red crab see?

Chaceon affinis · order Decapoda · Crustaceans

The deep-sea red crab has 2 colour receptor classes (380 and 480 nm), one of them in the ultraviolet.[1] Its sharpest vision resolves 0.15 cycles per degree, against 63.75 for people in this dataset.[6][7][8] The deep-sea red crab stops seeing flicker at 22.5 Hz, against 60 Hz for people.[26][27][28]

See your photo as a deep-sea red crab sees it: unlock all animals, €4.99Try a free animalOne-time payment. Your photo stays on your device.
  • 2colour receptor classesMeasured
  • 0.15cycles per degree (sharpness)Estimated
  • 22.5hertz flicker fusion (motion)Estimated

The deep-sea red crab (Chaceon affinis) is a crustacean in the order Decapoda. Its eyes belong to the vision type Crustacean (mantis shrimp, crab): compound eyes whose colour classes, ultraviolet and polarisation vision vary widely between species. Measured in this species: colour. Measured colour or sharpness: a measured receptor set or acuity in this species; other dials come from relatives or group defaults.

This is a simulation built from published eye measurements, not what the animal experiences.

Method: How we know what animals see (the See Like Animals vision engine) · Sources · Last updated . Every value below carries its evidence level and sources; nothing is typed by hand.

What the deep-sea red crab sees: colour receptors

Deep-sea red crab colour receptor peaks, 300 to 700 nmDeep-sea red crab: 2 receptor peaks at 380, 480 nm; you: 3 at 421.5, 532, 558.4 nm. ultraviolet300400500600700
Deep-sea red crab: 380, 480 nmPeople: 421.5, 532, 558.4 nmWavelength in nanometres

What does a deep-sea red crab's vision look like?

The deep-sea red crab has 2 colour receptor classes (380 and 480 nm), one of them in the ultraviolet.[1] Fine detail is blurred to what 0.15 cycles per degree can resolve.

Can the deep-sea red crab see colour?

Yes. The deep-sea red crab has 2 colour receptor classes (380 and 480 nm), one of them in the ultraviolet; people have 3.[1]

How far can the deep-sea red crab see?

Distance depends on the size of what is seen, so sharpness is the measure. The deep-sea red crab resolves 0.15 cycles per degree, against 63.75 for people in this dataset, so a detail must be about 425 times larger, or that much closer, for it to make it out as well as a person.[6][7][8]

Can the deep-sea red crab see in the dark?

The catalogue records activity pattern: nocturnal and rods vs cones: no rods (invertebrate photoreceptors). Night mode in the tool uses these traits by a stated engine rule, not a measured sensitivity.[2]

Does the deep-sea red crab see in slow motion?

The deep-sea red crab stops seeing flicker at 22.5 Hz, against 60 Hz for people in this dataset. So fast motion looks choppier to it than to people, not slower.[26][27][28]

What stands out

  • It has two colour receptor classes (a dichromat): reds and greens fall on one axis, as in red-green colour blindness in people.
  • Its sharpest vision resolves 0.15 cycles per degree: the finest stripe pattern it can tell apart from grey.
  • It stops seeing flicker at 22.5 Hz, against 60 Hz for people in this dataset, so fast motion looks choppier to it.[29][27]
  • Activity pattern: nocturnal.

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. The last column gives the values for people from the same catalogue.

Vision values for the deep-sea red crab (Chaceon affinis), catalogue-v1
DialValueEvidenceSourcesPeople
ColourColour receptors
2 receptor classes: 380 nm (UVS), 480 nm (MWS (green))
measured in this species
Measured[1]Colour receptors: 3 receptor classes: 421.5 nm (VS/SWS (violet)), 532 nm (MWS (green)), 558.4 nm (LWS (long)) Measured (not re-verified)[2][3][4][5]
Ultraviolet
yes: at least one receptor peaks in the ultraviolet		Measured
SharpnessAcuity
0.15 cycles per degree
median of 94 relatives in order Decapoda: Anchistus custos, Ancylomenes holthuisi, Ancylomenes pedersoni, Ancylomenes venustus, Austruca lactea, Brucecaris tenuis
Group default[6][7][8]Acuity: 63.75 cycles per degree Measured[9][10]
Angle between facets
1.6°
median of 1 relatives in class Malacostraca: Phronima sedentaria
Group default[11]
Eye type
compound eye
Field of viewNo value in the catalogue.Binocular overlap: 122.5° Measured[12][13]
Total field of view: 200° Measured (not re-verified)[14]
Blind area behind the head: 160° Derived[14]
Eye placement: frontal Derived[12][13]
Sharp zones (foveas)No value in the catalogue.Number of foveas: 1 Measured[15]
Fovea type: fovea Measured[15]
Night visionActivity pattern
nocturnal
group default: mode of tier-A values in vision type the "Crustacean (mantis shrimp, crab)" type within phylum Arthropoda (1 species: Ligia exotica)
Group default[2]Activity pattern: diurnal Measured (not re-verified)[16][17][18][2][19][20][21][22]
Pupil shape: vertical Group default[23][24]
Reflective layer (tapetum): no Measured[25]
Rods vs cones: cone-dominated Derived[16][17][18][2][19][20][21][22]
Rods vs cones
no rods (invertebrate photoreceptors)		Group default[2]
Motion (flicker fusion)Flicker fusion frequency
22.5 Hz
median of 24 relatives in order Decapoda: Eugonatonotus crassus, Eumunida picta, Gastroptychus spinifer, Funchalia villosa, Janicella spinicauda, Oplophorus gracilirostris
Group default[26][27][28]Flicker fusion frequency: 60 Hz Measured[29][27]

Other senses

  • polarisation vision: optional overlay of degree/angle of linear polarisation (Group default)

Related animals

More crustaceans: all crustaceans with measured vision data. Same eye type: Crustacean (mantis shrimp, crab).

Sources

  1. Porter ML. Crustacean photoreceptor lambda max compilation, Table 1-1 (dissertation, "Porter_2005" in VPOD); extracted from PDF by VPOD with tabula. github.com/VisualPhysiologyDB/visual-physiology-opsin-db
  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. Kirwan J. luxR 0.1.1: Underwater Light Analysis and Visual Ecology (R-universe), data species_sensitivities. github.com/JohnKirwan/luxR
  4. Müller B, Glösmann M, Peichl L, Knop GC, Hagemann C, Ammermüller J (2009) Bat eyes have ultraviolet-sensitive cone photoreceptors. PLoS ONE 4:e6390
  5. Thermal Activation and Photoactivation of Visual Pigments (2004)
  6. AndrewPMeade/FabricTools, sciphy/data_utils/datasets/Arthropod.CompoundEyes.csv (acuity, body length, light, media for 281 arthropods; columns match Feller et al. 2021 Arthropod Struct Dev 60:101002). github.com/AndrewPMeade/FabricTools
  7. Feller KD, Sharkey CR, McDuffee-Altekruse A, Bracken-Grissom HD, Lord NP, Porter ML, Schweikert LE 2021. Surf and turf vision: patterns and predictors of visual acuity in compound eye evolution. Arthropod Structure & Development 60:101002. doi.org/10.1016/j.asd.2020.101002
  8. Schweikert L, Davis A, Johnsen S et al. 2020. Visual perception of light organ patterns in deep‐sea shrimps and implications for conspecific recognition. Ecology and Evolution. doi.org/10.1002/ece3.6643
  9. Kirk EC, Kay RF 2004. The evolution of high visual acuity in the Anthropoidea. In Anthropoid Origins, Table 1 (behavioural acuity). doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8873-7_20
  10. Veilleux CC, Kirk EC 2014. Visual acuity in mammals. Brain Behav Evol 83:43, Supplementary Table 1 (cleaned CSV in Evo-M1-Trait-Data). doi.org/10.1159/000357830
  11. Bagheri Z, Jessop A, Partridge J et al. 2022. A new computational model illuminates the extraordinary eyes of Phronima. PLOS Computational Biology. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010545
  12. Heesy CP 2004. On the relationship between orbit orientation and binocular visual field overlap in mammals. Anat Rec 281A:1104, Table 1. doi.org/10.1002/ar.a.20116
  13. Heffner RS, Heffner HE 1992. Visual factors in sound localization in mammals. J Comp Neurol 317:219, Table 1 (via Evo-M1 sensory merge). doi.org/10.1002/cne.903170302
  14. species_v1:Campbell & Green 1965
  15. Kopania EEK, Clark NL. 2025. Mammalian retinal specializations for high acuity vision evolve in response to both foraging strategies and morphological constraints. Evolution Letters 9: qrae072. Supplementary Tables S1-S2.. doi.org/10.1093/evlett/qrae072
  16. 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
  17. Borges R, Johnson WE, O'Brien SJ, Gomes C, Heesy CP, Antunes A (2018) Adaptive genomic evolution of opsins reveals that early mammals flourished in nocturnal environments. BMC Genomics 19:121
  18. Wilman et al. 2014 EltonTraits 1.0, MamFuncDat.txt. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3559887.v1
  19. Maor R, Dayan T, Ferguson-Gow H, Jones KE. 2017. Temporal niche expansion in mammals from a nocturnal ancestor after dinosaur extinction. Nature Ecology & Evolution 1:1889-1895. Supplementary Table 1. doi.org/10.1038/s41559-017-0366-5
  20. Jones KE et al. 2009. PanTHERIA: a species-level database of life history, ecology, and geography of extant and recently extinct mammals. Ecology 90:2648. Ecological Archives E090-184. doi.org/10.1890/08-1494.1
  21. Schmitz L, Motani R. 2011. Science 332:705-708, SOM. doi.org/10.1126/science.1200043
  22. 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
  23. Banks MS, Sprague WW, Schmoll J, Parnell JAQ, Love GD. 2015. Science Advances 1:e1500391. doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1500391
  24. Cervino NG et al. 2021. A closer look at pupil diversity and evolution in frogs and toads. Proc R Soc B 288:20211402. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.15112050.v1
  25. Guareschi BLV, Sallum JMF, Salles MV, de Moraes JGO, Bortolini M, Cray C, Moore BA, da Rosa CC, Montiani-Ferreira F. 2025. GUCY2D-Associated Retinopathy: A Comparative Study Between Humans and German Spitz Dogs. Veterinary sciences 12(9):879. doi.org/10.3390/vetsci12090879
  26. 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
  27. 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
  28. 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
  29. 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

Every value cites its sources (all sources). Values were extracted from these works and converted (units, medians, derived values); changes are ours, and the listed sources do not endorse this site. Data: catalogue-v1, built 2026-09-29. Accuracy notes: how accurate is this? Method: how we know.