Open the tool

How does the Mongolian jird see?

The Mongolian jird (Meriones unguiculatus) is a mammal in the order Rodentia. Its eyes belong to the vision type Small prey mammal (UV): 2-3 cones often incl. UV (mouse, rat, hamster, dunnart), very low acuity, near-panoramic field.

Measured in this species: colour, sharpness, 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 Mongolian jird's eyes, using the values in the table below.
The same scene rendered for the Mongolian jird (60° field of view, daylight).
See your photo as the Mongolian jirdThis 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 Mongolian jird (Meriones unguiculatus), catalogue-v1
DialValueEvidenceSources
ColourColour receptors
3 receptor classes: 360 nm (UVS), 493 nm (MWS (green)), 512 nm (MWS (green))
measured in this species
Measured[1][2]
Ultraviolet
yes: at least one receptor peaks in the ultraviolet
Measured
SharpnessAcuity
1.8 cycles per degree
median of 1 behavioural rows (method priority rule)
Measured[3]
Field of viewBinocular overlap
48°
median of 1 rows (eyes-at-rest rows preferred)
Measured[4]
Eye placement
lateral
frontal if binocular overlap >= 60 deg, else lateral
Derived[4]
Sharp zones (foveas)Number of foveas
0
fovea_present / area_centralis_type (retinal topography; count 1 = fovea present, 0 = none)
Measured[5]
Fovea type
horizontal streak
Measured[5]
Night visionActivity pattern
cathemeral
mode of 5 rows (of 6 rows): cathemeral; mixed (nocturnal/crepuscular, cathemeral, crepuscular or diurnal/crepuscular)
Measured (not re-verified)[6][1][7][8][9][3]
Pupil shape
circular
Group default[10]
Reflective layer (tapetum)
no
Estimated[11][12]
Rods vs cones
mixed
nocturnal -> rod-dominated; crepuscular / cathemeral / mixed -> mixed; diurnal -> cone-dominated
Derived[6][1][7][8][9][3]
Motion (flicker fusion)Flicker fusion frequency
46.15 Hz
median of 2 relatives in family Muridae: Rattus norvegicus, Mus musculus
Estimated[13]

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. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. Wilman et al. 2014 EltonTraits 1.0, MamFuncDat.txt. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3559887.v1
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. 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
  10. Banks MS, Sprague WW, Schmoll J, Parnell JAQ, Love GD. 2015. Science Advances 1:e1500391. doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1500391
  11. species_v1:Healy et al. 2013
  12. species_v1:Nomura et al. 2019 (via Lafitte et al. 2022)
  13. 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
  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

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