
View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5. Pupil dynamics in (A) humans [Homo sapiens sapiens, data from De
Groot and Gebhard (De Groot and Gebhard,
1952 )], (B) cats [Felis sylvestris; broken line; data
from Wilcox and Barlow (Wilcox and Barlow,
1975 )] and mice [Mus musculus; solid line; data from
Grozdanic et al. (Grozdanic et al.,
2003 )], (C) snowy owls (Bubo scandiacus, N=2),
(D) Ural owls (Strix uralensis, N=2), (E) blue-fronted
parrots (Amazona aestiva, N=2), and (F) grey parrots
(Psittacus erithacus, N=2). Pupil size is given as
percentage area of the fully opened pupil. No systematic differences between
individuals of the same species of bird were observed, and pupil sizes were
averaged over both individuals, 8–10 samples/intensity level. The
gradient bar in A illustrates rod (scotopic)-, rod and cone (mesopic)- and
cone (photopic)-based vision in humans. The steepest portions of the curves
were compared by their first derivatives [f'(x)]. The
responsiveness of the pupillary light reflex is very high in mice and similar
tendencies are present in parrots. Humans, cats and owls have pupil dynamics
of lower gain. Furthermore, the parrot pupils open fully at illumination
levels comparable to human mesopic conditions while the owl pupils reach this
state in dimmer, human scotopic illumination. The horizontal broken line marks
the relative size of the innermost zone of the multifocal optics (the line in
B applies to the mice eyes only). The lens system can be regarded as
multifocal for pupil sizes that exceed this level. Error bars are standard
deviations.
|