Open the tool

How does the kinkajou see?

The kinkajou (Potos flavus) is a mammal in the order Carnivora. Its eyes belong to the vision type Day dichromat mammal.

Measured in this species: colour and night vision. Measured colour or sharpness: a measured receptor set or acuity in this species; other dials come from relatives or group defaults. Every value below carries its evidence level and sources; nothing is typed by hand.

See your photo as the kinkajouThis 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 kinkajou (Potos flavus), catalogue-v1
DialValueEvidenceSources
ColourColour receptors
1 receptor class: 548 nm (LWS (long))
measured in this species
Measured[1][2]
SharpnessAcuity
4.24 cycles per degree
allometry (Mammalia): log10(acuity_cpd) = intercept + slope * log10(eye_axial_length_mm); slope 1.2182, intercept -0.6097, R2 0.45, n 72 (fitted in this script; fitted range [1.9, 48.147] mm); eye_axial_length_mm…
Estimated[3]
Field of viewBinocular overlap
88.5°
median of 4 relatives in order Carnivora: Canis lupus, Felis catus, Mustela putorius, Mustela nivalis
Group default[4][5]
Total field of view
250°
median species-v1 total field of order Carnivora: Canis familiaris
Group default[6]
Sharp zones (foveas)Number of foveas
0
median of 10 relatives in order Carnivora: Canis lupus, Vulpes lagopus, Acinonyx jubatus, Felis catus, Crocuta crocuta, Enhydra lutris
Group default[7]
Fovea type
area centralis, horizontal streak		Group default[7]
Night visionActivity pattern
nocturnal
mode of 6 rows (of 6 rows): nocturnal; scotopic
Measured (not re-verified)[8][1][9][10][11][12]
Rods vs cones
rod-dominated
nocturnal -> rod-dominated; crepuscular / cathemeral / mixed -> mixed; diurnal -> cone-dominated
Derived[8][1][9][10][11][12]
Motion (flicker fusion)Flicker fusion frequency
76.25 Hz
median of 4 relatives in order Carnivora: Felis catus, Canis lupus, Pagophilus groenlandicus, Canis familiaris
Group default[13][14][15][16]

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. 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
  3. Vertebrate eye-size compilation in Thomas et al. 2020 Dryad deposit (Thomas_vertebrates.csv). Primary sources: Howland et al. 2004 (n=313); Schmitz & Wainwright 2011 (n=265); Schmitz et al. 2013 (n=237); Hall 2008 (n=116); Veilleux & Kirk 2014 (n=91); Hall & Heesy 2011 (n=88); Liu et al. 2012 (n=66); Werner & Seifan 2006 (n=62); Lisney & Collin 2007 (n=46). doi.org/10.5061/dryad.1zcrjdfq7
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. species_v1:Miller & Murphy 1995
  7. 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
  8. Wilman et al. 2014 EltonTraits 1.0, MamFuncDat.txt. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3559887.v1
  9. 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
  10. 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
  11. Schmitz L, Motani R. 2011. Science 332:705-708, SOM. doi.org/10.1126/science.1200043
  12. 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
  13. 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
  14. 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
  15. 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
  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

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