» Articles » PMID: 27802139

Visual Resolution and Contrast Sensitivity in Two Benthic Sharks

Overview
Journal J Exp Biol
Specialty Biology
Date 2016 Nov 2
PMID 27802139
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Sharks have long been described as having 'poor' vision. They are cone monochromats and anatomical estimates suggest they have low spatial resolution. However, there are no direct behavioural measurements of spatial resolution or contrast sensitivity. This study estimates contrast sensitivity and spatial resolution of two species of benthic sharks, the Port Jackson shark, Heterodontus portusjacksoni, and the brown-banded bamboo shark, Chiloscyllium punctatum, by recording eye movements in response to optokinetic stimuli. Both species tracked moving low spatial frequency gratings with weak but consistent eye movements. Eye movements ceased at 0.38 cycles per degree, even for high contrasts, suggesting low spatial resolution. However, at lower spatial frequencies, eye movements were elicited by low contrast gratings, 1.3% and 2.9% contrast in H portusjacksoni and C. punctatum, respectively. Contrast sensitivity was higher than in other vertebrates with a similar spatial resolving power, which may reflect an adaptation to the relatively low contrast encountered in aquatic environments. Optokinetic gain was consistently low and neither species stabilised the gratings on their retina. To check whether restraining the animals affected their optokinetic responses, we also analysed eye movements in free-swimming C. punctatum We found no eye movements that could compensate for body rotations, suggesting that vision may pass through phases of stabilisation and blur during swimming. As C. punctatum is a sedentary benthic species, gaze stabilisation during swimming may not be essential. Our results suggest that vision in sharks is not 'poor' as previously suggested, but optimised for contrast detection rather than spatial resolution.

Citing Articles

Conserved subcortical processing in visuo-vestibular gaze control.

Wibble T, Pansell T, Grillner S, Perez-Fernandez J Nat Commun. 2022; 13(1):4699.

PMID: 35948549 PMC: 9365791. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-32379-w.


A shark's eye view: testing the 'mistaken identity theory' behind shark bites on humans.

Ryan L, Slip D, Chapuis L, Collin S, Gennari E, Hemmi J J R Soc Interface. 2021; 18(183):20210533.

PMID: 34699727 PMC: 8548079. DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2021.0533.


Functional integration of eye tissues and refractive eye development: Mechanisms and pathways.

Summers J, Schaeffel F, Marcos S, Wu H, Tkatchenko A Exp Eye Res. 2021; 209:108693.

PMID: 34228967 PMC: 11697408. DOI: 10.1016/j.exer.2021.108693.


Genome-wide analysis of retinal transcriptome reveals common genetic network underlying perception of contrast and optical defocus detection.

Tkatchenko T, Tkatchenko A BMC Med Genomics. 2021; 14(1):153.

PMID: 34107987 PMC: 8190860. DOI: 10.1186/s12920-021-01005-x.


Polarization contrasts and their effect on the gaze stabilization of crustaceans.

Drerup C, How M J Exp Biol. 2021; 224(Pt 7).

PMID: 33692078 PMC: 8077661. DOI: 10.1242/jeb.229898.