Aerial and aquatic visual acuity of the grey bichir <scp><i>Polypterus senegalus</i></scp>, as estimated by optokinetic response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study assessed the aerial and aquatic visual abilities of juvenile grey bichir Polypterus senegalus, fish capable of terrestrial locomotion, by measuring the optokinetic response to stimuli of varying speed and spatial frequency. In water, fish tracked slow‐moving (2° s−1) stimuli moderately well and fast‐moving stimuli very poorly. Spatial acuity was very low compared with many other species, with maximum response observed at 0.05–0.075 stimulus cycles per degree of visual arc; however, it should be noted that adult fish, with their larger eyes, are likely to have somewhat improved spatial acuity. Low spatial acuity and limited stimulus tracking ability might be expected in a nocturnal ambush predator such as P. senegalus, where gaze stabilization may be less crucial and other sensory inputs may have greater importance in perception of the environment. In air, spatial and temporal acuity were both poorer by every measure, but some visual ability persisted. As the eye shows no anatomical specialization for aerial vision, poor vision was expected; however, the large decrease in saccade velocity observed in air trials was unexpected. Stimulus parameters typically have little effect on the characteristics of the saccade, so this finding may suggest that the function of the reflex system itself could be compromised in the aerial vision of some fishes capable of terrestrial locomotion.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".