Open the tool

How does the long-tailed chinchilla see?

The long-tailed chinchilla (Chinchilla lanigera) is a mammal in the order Rodentia. Its eyes belong to the vision type Small prey mammal (UV).

Measured in this species: foveas and night vision. One measured dial: a value other than colour or sharpness is measured in this species; colour and sharpness are not measured here. Every value below carries its evidence level and sources; nothing is typed by hand.

See your photo as the long-tailed chinchillaThis 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 long-tailed chinchilla (Chinchilla lanigera), catalogue-v1
DialValueEvidenceSources
ColourColour receptors
1 receptor class: 360 nm (UVS)
ESTIMATE: receptor classes from opsin-gene presence in this species; lambda max per class from the measured class template of the nearest taxon (never from the gene itself)
Group default[1][2][3]
Ultraviolet
yes: at least one receptor peaks in the ultraviolet		Group default
SharpnessAcuity
4.109 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 10.1 mm
Estimated[4]
Field of viewBinocular overlap
52°
median of 15 relatives in order Rodentia: Octodon degus, Octodon lunatus, Rattus rattus, Mus musculus, Mesocricetus auratus, Sciurus carolinensis
Group default[5][6][7][8]
Sharp zones (foveas)Number of foveas
0
fovea_present / area_centralis_type (retinal topography; count 1 = fovea present, 0 = none)
Measured[9]
Fovea type
horizontal streak		Measured[9]
Night visionActivity pattern
nocturnal
mode of 6 rows (of 7 rows): cathemeral; mixed (nocturnal/crepuscular, cathemeral, crepuscular or diurnal/crepuscular); nocturnal; nocturnal/crepuscular
Measured (not re-verified)[10][1][11][12][13][14]
Rods vs cones
rod-dominated
nocturnal -> rod-dominated; crepuscular / cathemeral / mixed -> mixed; diurnal -> cone-dominated
Derived[10][1][11][12][13][14]
Motion (flicker fusion)Flicker fusion frequency
62.5 Hz
median of 7 relatives in order Rodentia: Rattus norvegicus, Cavia porcellus, Mus musculus, Callospermophilus lateralis, Tamias amoenus, Tamiasciurus hudsonicus
Group default[15][16][17][18]

Related animals

More mammals: all mammals with measured vision data.

Sources

  1. 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
  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. Baker J. & Venditti C. 2019. Rapid change in mammalian eye shape is explained by activity pattern. Current Biology 29:1082-1088, Table S3 (eye data from Hall, Kamilar & Kirk 2012).. doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.02.017
  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. Vega-Zuniga T, Medina FS, Fredes F, et al. 2013. Does nocturnality drive binocular vision? Octodontine rodents as a case study. PLoS ONE 8: e84199.. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0084199
  8. Vega-Zuniga T, Medina FS, Marín G, Letelier JC, Palacios AG, Němec P, Schleich CE, Mpodozis J. (2017). Selective binocular vision loss in two subterranean caviomorph rodents: Spalacopus cyanus and Ctenomys talarum. Scientific reports
  9. 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
  10. 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
  11. Wilman et al. 2014 EltonTraits 1.0, MamFuncDat.txt. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3559887.v1
  12. 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
  13. 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
  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. 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
  16. 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
  17. 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
  18. 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?