Eye Shape and Retinal Topography in Owls (Aves: Strigiformes)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The eyes of vertebrates show adaptations to the visual environments in which they evolve. For example, eye shape is associated with activity pattern, while retinal topography is related to the symmetry or 'openness' of the habitat of a species. Although these relationships are well documented in many vertebrates including birds, the extent to which they hold true for species within the same avian order is not well understood. Owls (Strigiformes) represent an ideal group for the study of interspecific variation in the avian visual system because they are one of very few avian orders to contain species that vary in both activity pattern and habitat preference. Here, we examined interspecific variation in eye shape and retinal topography in nine species of owl. Eye shape (the ratio of corneal diameter to eye axial length) differed among species, with nocturnal species having relatively larger corneal diameters than diurnal species. All the owl species have an area of high retinal ganglion cell (RGC) density in the temporal retina and a visual streak of increased cell density extending across the central retina from temporal to nasal. However, the organization and degree of elongation of the visual streak varied considerably among species and this variation was quantified using H:V ratios. Species that live in open habitats and/or that are more diurnally active have well-defined, elongated visual streaks and high H:V ratios (3.88-2.33). In contrast, most nocturnal and/or forest-dwelling owls have a poorly defined visual streak, a more radially symmetrical arrangement of RGCs and lower H:V ratios (1.77-1.27). The results of a hierarchical cluster analysis indicate that the apparent interspecific variation is associated with activity pattern and habitat as opposed to the phylogenetic relationships among species. In seven species, the presence of a fovea was confirmed and it is suggested that all strigid owls may possess a fovea, whereas the tytonid barn owl (Tyto alba) does not. A size-frequency analysis of cell soma area indicates that a number of different RGC classes are represented in owls, including a population of large RGCs (cell soma area >150 µm(2)) that resemble the giant RGCs reported in other vertebrates. In conclusion, eye shape and retinal topography in owls vary among species and this variation is associated with different activity patterns and habitat preferences, thereby supporting similar observations in other vertebrates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".