Open the tool

How does the cat see?

The cat (Felis catus) is a mammal in the order Carnivora. Its eyes belong to the vision type Night-hunting cat: 2 cones, low acuity, rod-rich retina + tapetum (dim-light gain), wide binocular overlap, lower CFF.

Measured in this species: colour, sharpness, field of view, foveas, 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 cat's eyes, using the values in the table below.
The same scene rendered for the cat (60° field of view, daylight).
See your photo as the catThis 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 cat (Felis catus), catalogue-v1
DialValueEvidenceSources
ColourColour receptors
2 receptor classes: 450 nm (SWS (blue)), 555 nm (LWS (long))
measured in this species
Measured[1]
SharpnessAcuity
8.8 cycles per degree
median of 3 behavioural rows (method priority rule)
Measured[2][3][4]
Field of viewBinocular overlap
112.5°
median of 2 rows (eyes-at-rest rows preferred)
Measured[5][6]
Total field of view
250°
median species-v1 total field of order Carnivora: Canis familiaris
Group default[7]
Blind area behind the head
110°		Group default[7]
Eye placement
frontal
frontal if binocular overlap >= 60 deg, else lateral
Derived[5][6]
Sharp zones (foveas)Number of foveas
0
fovea_present / area_centralis_type (retinal topography; count 1 = fovea present, 0 = none)
Measured[8]
Fovea type
area centralis, horizontal streak		Measured[8]
Night visionActivity pattern
cathemeral
mode of 8 rows (of 8 rows): cathemeral; cathemeral (polyphasic); mesopic; nocturnal
Measured (not re-verified)[9][10][11][12][1][13][14][4]
Pupil shape
vertical		Measured[10]
Reflective layer (tapetum)
yes		Measured[15]
Rods vs cones
mixed
nocturnal -> rod-dominated; crepuscular / cathemeral / mixed -> mixed; diurnal -> cone-dominated
Derived[9][10][11][12][1][13][14][4]
Motion (flicker fusion)Flicker fusion frequency
75 Hz
median of 1 bright-light rows (behavioural/whole-eye ERG rows; all rows: [55.0, 75.0])
Measured (not re-verified)[16]

Comparisons

Related animals

More mammals: all mammals with measured vision data.

Sources

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. 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
  7. species_v1:Miller & Murphy 1995
  8. 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
  9. 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
  10. Banks MS, Sprague WW, Schmoll J, Parnell JAQ, Love GD. 2015. Science Advances 1:e1500391. doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1500391
  11. 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
  12. Wilman et al. 2014 EltonTraits 1.0, MamFuncDat.txt. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3559887.v1
  13. Schmitz L, Motani R. 2011. Science 332:705-708, SOM. doi.org/10.1126/science.1200043
  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. Schwab IR, Yuen CK, Buyukmihci NC, Blankenship TN, Fitzgerald PG. 2002. Evolution of the tapetum. Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society 100:187-99; discussion 199-200. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1358962/
  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?