Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,446 Year: 3,703/9,624 Month: 574/974 Week: 187/276 Day: 27/34 Hour: 8/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution would've given us infrared eyesight
Meddle
Member (Idle past 1292 days)
Posts: 179
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


Message 153 of 265 (495476)
01-22-2009 10:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RickCHodgin
01-20-2009 5:24 AM


Okay think of it this way. Our vision system is based on two types of cells, rods and cones. Cone cells are responsible for our colour vision and in humans there are three types, responding to short, medium, and long wavelengths of light (which correspond to blue, green, and red light respectively). Now the majority of mammals with colour vision have only two types of cone cells, are dichromatic. As far as we know only humans and some closely related primates (and interestingly at least two species of marsupial) are trichromatic, so we're already doing quite well
Now if infrared was to be added to our repertoire of visible wavelengths, it is likely that another type of cone cell would be required. For example, birds can see the same wavelengths as us, but can also see ultraviolet, since they have four types of cone cells. By contrast bees have three cone cells like us and can see ultraviolet, but cannot see light from the red end of the spectrum that we can see.
Rod cells differentiate between light and dark, and are more sensitive to light than cone cells. In animals that are nocturnal, rod cells predominate on the retina. Don't assume that just because you stumble about in the dark, other animals have the same problem, since you are a diurnal animal so will have far fewer rod cells. Of course with fewer cone cells, nocturnal animals have poorer colour vision, and rod cells slower response to light means they are less accurate and less sensitive to movement. Note that rod cells are sensitive to light in the blue-green wavelengths and do not respond to red light.
So for IR vision to function requires an increase in these IR responsive cells would reduce either the number of cone cells, so reducing colour vision during the day, or reducing the number of rod cells and impeding general night vision. Of course it would be more likely both, since as others have said infrared wavelengths have very low energy, and any IR light from the environment will have to compete with IR in the form of heat produced by the animal. This isn't helped by the fact that the retina is backwards, so there is a network of capillaries carrying warm blood between these IR cone cells and the environment.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RickCHodgin, posted 01-20-2009 5:24 AM RickCHodgin has not replied

Meddle
Member (Idle past 1292 days)
Posts: 179
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


Message 158 of 265 (495905)
01-25-2009 3:07 AM
Reply to: Message 156 by RAZD
01-23-2009 11:37 AM


Re: Infrared range pedantry
RAZD writes:
AND block the infra-red coming off the arteries etc inside the eye (see Malcolm's excellent post Message 153)
Thank you. As a long time lurker on this site, having read many of your excellent posts, that means a lot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by RAZD, posted 01-23-2009 11:37 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024