Open the tool

How does the green anole see?

The green anole (Anolis carolinensis) is a reptile in the order not recorded. Its eyes belong to the vision type Diurnal reptile tetrachromat: 4 cones incl. UV with oil droplets, fovea(s); turtles' red droplets extend red sensitivity.

Measured in this species: colour, 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 green anole's eyes, using the values in the table below.
The same scene rendered for the green anole (60° field of view, daylight).
See your photo as the green anoleThis 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 green anole (Anolis carolinensis), catalogue-v1
DialValueEvidenceSources
ColourColour receptors
4 receptor classes: 365 nm (UVS), 462 nm (SWS (blue)), 503 nm (MWS (green)), 625 nm (LWS (long))
measured in this species
Measured[1]
Ultraviolet
yes: at least one receptor peaks in the ultraviolet		Measured
SharpnessNo value in the catalogue.
Field of viewNo value in the catalogue.
Sharp zones (foveas)Number of foveas
2
species-v1.csv text: 2 (central + temporal foveae)
Measured[2][3]
Fovea type
central fovea, temporal		Measured[2][3]
Night visionActivity pattern
diurnal
mode of 7 rows (of 7 rows): Diurnal; diurnal
Measured (not re-verified)[4][5][6][1][7][8][9]
Pupil shape
round (or oval)		Group default[10][11]
Rods vs cones
cone-dominated
nocturnal -> rod-dominated; crepuscular / cathemeral / mixed -> mixed; diurnal -> cone-dominated
Derived[4][5][6][1][7][8][9]
Motion (flicker fusion)Flicker fusion frequency
34.6 Hz
median of 2 bright-light rows (behavioural/whole-eye ERG rows; all rows: [34.55, 34.6])
Measured[12][13]

Related animals

More reptiles: all reptiles 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. Rasys AM, Wegerski A, Trainor PA, Hufnagel RB, Menke DB, Lauderdale JD. 2024. Dynamic changes in ocular shape during human development and its implications for retina fovea formation. BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology 46(1):e2300054. doi.org/10.1002/bies.202300054
  3. species_v1:Fleishman et al. 1988 / Makaretz & Levine 1980
  4. 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
  5. Angielczyk KD, Schmitz L 2014. Nocturnality in synapsids predates the origin of mammals by over 100 million years. Proc R Soc B 281: 20141642. Dryad doi:10.5061/dryad.1v8kj.. doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.1642
  6. Choiniere JN, Neenan JM, Schmitz L, Ford DP, Chapelle KEJ, Balanoff AM, Sipla JS, Georgi JA, Walsh SA, Norell MA, Xu X, Clark JM, Benson RBJ. 2021. Evolution of vision and hearing modalities in theropod dinosaurs. Science 372:610-613. doi:10.1126/science.abe7941. Data: https://osf.io/teq73/. doi.org/10.1126/science.abe7941
  7. Schmitz & Motani 2011. Nocturnality in dinosaurs inferred from scleral ring and orbit morphology. Science 332:705. Comparative data redeposited in Xing et al. 2020 supplementary information (Zenodo).. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3591994
  8. Meiri 2024. SquamBase: a database of squamate (Reptilia: Squamata) traits. Global Ecol Biogeogr (data Zenodo 10602503).. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10602503
  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. Oskyrko O, Mi C, Meiri S, Du W. 2024. ReptTraits: a comprehensive dataset of ecological traits in reptiles. Scientific Data 11 (doi:10.1038/s41597-024-03079-5). Dataset v1-2 (includes Meiri 2018 lizard traits). doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.24572683.v4
  12. 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
  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

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