In herbivorous animals like cows, goats, sheep, rabbits etc, we mostly observe monocular vision i.e. the eyes of the animal are on different planes. \n\nOn the other hand, in most carnivores especially felines (cats), we see that the vision is wholly or partially binocular i.e. both the eyes are on the same plane. \n\nIs there a direct relation between the type of vision and the food-habits of an animal? \n\nIf not, what other factors decide the type of vision (monocular or binocular) in an animal?
132901
Interesting! You've already gotten some good answers, but I'll add my two cents.\nI think that, more than being related specifically to food-habits, this trait is related to habitat and overall habitus (which includes not only food type but also food consecution mechanisms, locomotor type and other characteristics of habitat use). And of course, to evolutionary history. All lineages have adaptations and constraints of their own.\nAs a basic consideration, most animals that live in terrestrial habitats move in a mostly 2-dimensional world. Flying and climbing animals are the exception, as well as those that may expect predators to come from above. Aquatic environments, on the other hand, are always very much 3-dimensional.\n\nIf we consider vertebrates (which I guess it's what your question was aiming at), most have eyes placed more or less laterally on the head, ensuring an extensive vision field with some (small) binocular central area. Of course, the tradeoff for lateralised eyes is that reduced superimposition of both eyes' fields, thus lesser binocular vision. In the same manner, frontal eyes reduce the total field of vision.\nA (very partial) list of terrestrial vertebrates with frontal eyes and/or enhanced stereopsis (binocular vision):\n\n-Plethodontid salamanders.\n-Chameleons, geckoes, varanids (Komodo dragons), and many arboreal snakes, among reptiles.\n- Strigiformes (owls) and Falconiformes (eagles, hawks...), but also the kakapo, a nocturnal Australian parrot, and the frogmouths (Caprimulgiformes Podargidae). \n-Many generalized marsupials such as opossums; primates and felids.\n\nNot all these animals are predators, and there are several predators with lateral eyes and mostly monocular vision. \nSo, in my opinion, the main factor is not so much what you eat, but how you get it and where you usually move.\n \nFor example, let's take the case of mammals. The earliest known fossils seem to have had nocturnal habits and partially frontal eyes, such as those seen today in opossums. From there, I can visualize different evolutionary paths tending to more laterally placed eyes in animals that have to avoid predators (such as many herbivores - e.g. hoofed mammals- , insectivores or omnivores), and more frontally placed eyes in mammals that require good 3-D vision, be it hunters (as felids) or species that move in a 3-D environment (primates), and/or have nocturnal activity. \n\nOther vertebrate groups have different evolutionary paths and adaptive histories. For instance, the eyes of all birds are extremely large in comparison with other vertebrates, with very wide vision fields; and all birds have binocular vision to some extent. Only specialized predator birds have frontal eyes, but I guess that all birds use their enlarged cerebellum to calculate distances on the basis of the 20-30º binocular field. \n\nAquatic fish-like vertebrates privilege wider vision angles, but there are fish with good binocular vision, such as the hammerhead sharks and also many deep-sea bony fish species. In the case of the first ones, it could be a predator specialization, whereas in the latter case it could be related to vision in low-light environments.\n\nArthropods have a different system altogether, and I think their adaptations and constraints merit a separate discussion (what an elegant way of avoiding it!). \n\nSo, although we like to identify patterns that allow us better understanding of the biological world, I don't think there is a direct relationship with a single factor. The list of possible factors influencing vision type includes:\n- phylogenetic history (including previous adaptations and constraints)\n- locomotor habit (running, flying, climbing)\n- feeding habit (including type of food and ways of searching for it)\n- diurnal/nocturnal activity\n\nI'm sure I'm leaving important things out... I'm not even sure if this all makes sense!\n\n-----------\nUpdate: Gianguru, you're amazing.
346869
Actually, there's a lot more than two species.\n\nThe family Gyrinidae, commonly known as whirligig beetles includes about 700 species world wide, all of which have their compound eyes split into four functional elements.  \n\nThe split eye system is quite useful for them as they live their lives scooting about on the water's surface like little motor-boats.  The upper pair of eyes is able to scan above for aerial and surface predators, such as birds or fishing spiders, while the the lower pair of eyes watches for fishies and dragonfly larvae.\n\nSince all this watching for predators doesn't leave them much to watch for prey with, they also use their antennae for sonar echolocation - detecting ripples in the water's surface.  Then they zoom over to anything that falls in the water and gig into it until it's dead.\n\nAnother beetle with four eyes is Tetraopes tetraophthalmus, the red milkweed beetle.  It is a Cerambycid (long-horned beetle) whose antennae have grown so large that they effectively cut their compound eye into two sections.  Like many critters that feed on milkweed (like monarch butterflies), Tetraopes are toxic, and their bright red colour is a warning to predators not to eat them cuz yuck.
319937
I think Saul of Tarsus was correct when he poetically observed that "we see through a glass, darkly". Our perceptions are a single mode of reality, but there are other modes that we cannot percieve directly, such as the world of the very small and the world of the very large. We must use the scientific method and instruments to enable us to indirectly extend our ability and percieve the things that we can't otherwise observe, but that do have a bearing on our lives nonetheless.\n\nI find it very interesting that the world of human perception is in the middle of the world of things, including size, velocity, temperature, and light, among other possible characteristics of the universe. The extremes extend to both sides of our perceptual abilities, both above and below. I think this is philosophically significant, but I have yet to ascertain exactly what that significance is.
75331
*Chuckling* Actually just because they are carnivores does not mean they do not eat some plants.\nWolves are carnivores (meat eaters) but they will eat other foods as well. Their diet ranges from big game, such as elk and moose, to earthworms, nuts, berries (vitamin C) and grasshoppers.\nTo avoid using too much energy catching their food, wolves prey on weaker members of a herd, such as old, young or sick animals. In summer, when the herds migrate, wolves eat mice, birds and even fish. They may also eat carrion.\nhttp://www.wolfweb.com/diet.html
175804
There's a peak absorbance of rods and cones in the retina.  Humans have three peaks which represent the primary colors (for light) red, green, and blue.  The colors we see are our brain's interpretation of input on those three colors plus general light level input from rods.  Based on the numbers of rods and cones and the absorbance spectra of the different cones, researches can get an idea of the color vision of different animals.\n\nMost mammals are dichromatic (two colors).  Note how non-colorful they tend to be.  Certain primates are trichromatic (three colors).  Birds, reptiles, amphibians, and insects are also trichromatic or more.  Note how colorful they tend to be.
363059
Different animals see different ranges of color.  Scientists can determine this largely by looking at the structure of the eye, to understand what light waves a structure responds to.
561888
Many mammals are altricial, that is, they're born with closed eyes and ears, and unable to move for themselves. Many others are precocial, that is, they are born with open eyes and ears, good motor coordination and are able to follow their mother a short time after being born. \nThese two evolutionary strategies are not correlated with the "furry" quality; indeed you can find examples of both in closely related species, such as rabbits (altricial) and hares (precocial); or rats (altricial) and guinea pigs (precocial).  All of these are quite furry :-)\nThere is no clear phylogenetic correlation for these traits, which means that not all the species descended from one particular clade have the same strategy. It's very probable that they represent different evolutionary adaptive strategies: animals that give birth in open habitats and/or are exposed to predators often have precocial young (also dolphins and whales,for obvious reasons); whereas other species that use burrows or give birth in otherwise sheltered places have altricial young. The duration of pregnancy also varies; generally precocial young are born after relatively longer pregnancies, which means greater stress on the mother's body and higher vulnerability for her before delivery. \nIn the case of human infants, I guess (but it's just my guess) that since vision is our strongest sense and visual communication is so important, it starts to develop right at birth. However, we're altricial in other respects and human babies depend completely on their mothers.
150833
animals are generally classed as carnivores (those that eat other animals), herbivores (those that eat plants) or omnivores (those that eat both plants and animals).\n\nThese classifications are not absolute.  Cats and wolves are considered carnivores, but will sometimes also eat plant material.  Hippos are considered herbivores, but have been known to eat meat too.\n\nWithin each classification, there are also different names to refer to specialities within each type.  For example, a carnivore could be called a piscivore (eats fish) or insectivore (eats insects), and a herbivore could be called a graminivore (eats grasses) or frugivore (eats fruit).
58506
>>>>>(IT IS NOT HOMEWORK! i am competing with a friend for the >>>>> best example)\n\nAnd cheating by asking strangers on the internet. I like the way you think.\n\nThe most extreme example of bacterial endosymbiosis amongst mammals is without a doubt the presence of mitochondria. You might not relaise it but mitochondria are stable line bacterial endosymbionts, complete with there own genetic structure. It's hard to top that.\n\nAfter that probably comes the entire rumen structure of ruminants. Its incredibly cmmplicated, but basically the stomach of cows and sheep is one massive bacterial fermentor. The cow eats grass but is totally unable to digest it. Instead it grinds the grass up fine and swallow sit to wet it. It leave sit in the stomach to fermenta while then brings it up to shew again after the bacteria have softened it. The food then goes back down for even more fermentation in the other three chambers of the stomach. To add to the elegance of this system cows don't just excrete their urea through their kidneys like other mammals. Urea is  a waste in mammals and is poisonous, but it is also a good fertiliser. Ruminants excrete their urea through their salivary glands. It then passes into the stomach and what was a poison to the cow becomes fertiliser for the bacetria, who convert the waste urea into protein that the cow can use. As a reuslt ruminants are the only mammals in the world tht can survive with no protein input intheir deit at all. Which explains why they have been so extraordinarily successful at surviving in harsh and low nutrient environments.\n\nLast comes the biosynthesis of vitamins. Mammals can't   make their own vitamins, they normally need to take it in on the food. However numerous mammals species from dogs to horses are able to harvest those vitamins from bacteria that grow in their guts. So although a dog lives on a diet that is horrendously deficient in 3 or four vitamins it never gets ill or needs to take vitamin tablets. Which is pretty clever.
208505
A vegetarian, not likely. Through the design of creation of happenstance or evolution (which is a different argument, for another time) I am at a certain place in the food chain, as is the rabbit. So as a result I will allow the rabbit to eat his food, and I will in-turn eat the rabbit.
497308
That is not an exactly true statement. One of the most powerful animals for its size is the ant. Some birds and firs are much more ferocious then the big carnivores. Often people say their favorites are the big carnivores because of their perceptions of themselves and how they see others.
269454
They do have taste buds and have a definite preference of one type of food over another.  Also, animals have an excellent sense of smell and that is an important component of how food tastes and determining if one thing is better to eat than another.
643413
Chances are they have a visiual cue to the colour of the berries. Its really a co-evolutionary thing. The tree wants to spread its seeds so it signals to the bird with bright red berries for example....come and eat me. Also many birds have very acute vision.....think of vultures flying high above the plains scanning for carrion. Animal senses can be very different from ours.\nCheers.
649299
Seeing-eye dog.\nWalks on four legs, like a chair (b/c a chair has 4 legs)
455629
" due to my interest into animals sleeping patterns, i have decided to investigate in to whether artificial light could affect the way that certain animals sleep. To carry out this investigation i will do the following ...... \nMy hypothesis ( theory / idea to the outcome) would be that artifficial light does ....\nsomething like that should give you a start
553531
An eye is an organ of vision that detects light. Different kinds of light-sensitive organs are found in a variety of organisms. The simplest eyes do nothing but detect whether the surroundings are light or dark, while more complex eyes can distinguish shapes and colors. Many animals, including some mammals, birds, reptiles and fish, have two eyes which may be placed on the same plane to be interpreted as a single three-dimensional "image" (binocular vision), as in humans; or on different planes producing two separate "images" (monocular vision), such as in rabbits and chameleons.
16611
Each of the eyes are slightly recessed, and each eye points in a slightly different direction.  This makes it so that depending on which eye detects the most light, the insect is able to determine the direction of the light.  Humans, by contrast, find the location of light by having a lens which focuses the incoming light on the photo-sensitive retina at the back of the eye.