Binocular field configuration in owls: the role of foraging ecology.


Journal

Proceedings. Biological sciences
ISSN: 1471-2954
Titre abrégé: Proc Biol Sci
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101245157

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
25 10 2023
Historique:
medline: 23 10 2023
pubmed: 18 10 2023
entrez: 17 10 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The binocular field of vision differs widely in birds depending on ecological traits such as foraging. Owls (Strigiformes) have been considered to have a unique binocular field, but whether it is related to foraging has remained unknown. While taking into account allometry and phylogeny, we hypothesized that both daily activity cycle and diet determine the size and shape of the binocular field in owls. Here, we compared the binocular field configuration of 23 species of owls. While we found no effect of allometry and phylogeny, ecological traits strongly influence the binocular field shape and size. Binocular field shape of owls significantly differed from that of diurnal raptors. Among owls, binocular field shape was relatively conserved, but binocular field size differed among species depending on ecological traits, with larger binocular fields in species living in dense habitat and foraging on invertebrates. Our results suggest that (i) binocular field shape is associated with the time of foraging in the daily cycle (owls versus diurnal raptors) and (ii) that binocular field size differs between closely related owl species even though the general shape is conserved, possibly because the field of view is partially restricted by feathers, in a trade-off with auditory localization.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37848065
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2023.0664
pmc: PMC10581762
doi:

Banques de données

figshare
['10.6084/m9.figshare.c.6857950']

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

20230664

Références

Syst Biol. 2014 May;63(3):397-408
pubmed: 24500037
J Anat. 2022 Aug;241(2):527-534
pubmed: 35315065
Exp Brain Res. 2002 Feb;142(4):551-61
pubmed: 11845250
J Vis. 2009 Oct 14;9(11):14.1-19
pubmed: 20053077
Anat Rec. 1991 Feb;229(2):271-7
pubmed: 2012314
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2014 Jan 06;369(1636):20130040
pubmed: 24395967
Curr Protoc Bioinformatics. 2020 Mar;69(1):e96
pubmed: 32162851
J Exp Biol. 2016 Sep 1;219(Pt 17):2639-49
pubmed: 27317812
Nature. 2012 Nov 15;491(7424):444-8
pubmed: 23123857
Vision Res. 1977;17(10):1163-75
pubmed: 595380
Brain Behav Evol. 1999;53(2):55-66
pubmed: 9933782
Brain Behav Evol. 2000 Dec;56(6):340-4
pubmed: 11326139
J Exp Biol. 2018 Jul 17;221(Pt 14):
pubmed: 29776998
Brain Behav Evol. 2017;90(3):232-242
pubmed: 29020667
Vision Res. 1989;29(12):1693-8
pubmed: 2631390
Science. 2008 Jun 27;320(5884):1763-8
pubmed: 18583609
J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol. 2006 Oct;192(10):1073-82
pubmed: 16721575
Proc Biol Sci. 2023 Oct 25;290(2009):20230664
pubmed: 37848065
J Morphol. 2011 Jan;272(1):118-28
pubmed: 21069752
Bioinformatics. 2008 Jan 1;24(1):129-31
pubmed: 18006550
Ecol Lett. 2022 Mar;25(3):581-597
pubmed: 35199922
Brain Behav Evol. 1975;12(1-2):97-115
pubmed: 811324
Vision Res. 1984;24(12):1739-51
pubmed: 6533997
J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol. 2006 Dec;192(12):1313-26
pubmed: 16944165
Anat Histol Embryol. 2019 May;48(3):177-200
pubmed: 30734347
Nature. 1977 Aug 18;268(5621):636-8
pubmed: 895859
Vis Neurosci. 2009 Jan-Feb;26(1):73-80
pubmed: 19152718
Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2020 Oct;106:116-126
pubmed: 32654971
Mol Biol Evol. 2020 Feb 1;37(2):599-603
pubmed: 31633786
PLoS One. 2009 Nov 05;4(11):e7721
pubmed: 19890389
Am Nat. 2017 Jun;189(6):709-717
pubmed: 28514631
J Exp Biol. 2014 Jan 15;217(Pt 2):225-34
pubmed: 24431144
Doc Ophthalmol. 2002 Jan;104(1):107-18
pubmed: 11949804
Vision Res. 1973 Apr;13(4):889-91
pubmed: 4706362
Brain Behav Evol. 2012;79(4):218-36
pubmed: 22722085
J Exp Biol. 1971 Jun;54(3):535-73
pubmed: 5090092
PLoS One. 2010 Sep 22;5(9):e12802
pubmed: 20877645
Vision Res. 2019 May;158:109-119
pubmed: 30825468

Auteurs

Simon Potier (S)

Department of Biology, Lund University, Sölvegatan 35, Lund S-22362, Sweden.
Les Ailes de l'Urga, 72 rue de la vieille route, 27320 Marcilly la Campagne, France.

Alexandre Roulin (A)

Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Biophore 1015, Switzerland.

Graham R Martin (GR)

School of Biosciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.

Steven J Portugal (SJ)

Department of Biological Science, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, UK.

Vincent Bonhomme (V)

ISEM, Univ Montpellier, CNRS, EPHE, IRD, 34095 Montpellier, France.
Équipe Dynamique de la biodiversité, anthropo-écologie, Place Eugène Bataillon - CC065, 34095 Montpellier Cedex 5, France.

Thierry Bouchet (T)

Académie de Fauconnerie, SAS Puy du Fou France, 85500 Les Epesses, France.

Romuald de Romans (R)

Espace Rambouillet, Office National des Forêts, route du coin du bois, 78120 Sonchamp, France.

Eva Meyrier (E)

Les Aigles du Léman, Domaine de Guidou, 74140 Sciez sur Léman, France.

Almut Kelber (A)

Department of Biology, Lund University, Sölvegatan 35, Lund S-22362, Sweden.

Articles similaires

Robotic Surgical Procedures Animals Humans Telemedicine Models, Animal

Odour generalisation and detection dog training.

Lyn Caldicott, Thomas W Pike, Helen E Zulch et al.
1.00
Animals Odorants Dogs Generalization, Psychological Smell
Animals TOR Serine-Threonine Kinases Colorectal Neoplasms Colitis Mice
Animals Tail Swine Behavior, Animal Animal Husbandry

Classifications MeSH