Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25398576›Full record

ReviewJournal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology2015

Eye movements of vertebrates and their relation to eye form and function.

Michael F Land

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

57 citing papers in PubMed, 155 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Vertical optokinetic eye movements in the larval zebrafish.The Journal of experimental biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael F LandSchool of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9QG, UK, m.f.land@sussex.ac.uk.
University of Sussex · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The types of eye movements shown by all vertebrates originated in the earliest fishes. These consisted of compensatory movements, both vestibular and visual, to prevent image motion, and saccades to relocate gaze. All vertebrates fixate food items with their heads to enable ingestion, but from teleosts onwards some species also use eye movements to target particular objects, especially food. Eye movement use is related to the resolution distribution in the retina, with eyes that contain foveas, or areas of high ganglion cell density, being more likely to make targeting eye movements, not seen in animals with more uniform retinas. Birds, in particular, tend mainly to use head movements when shifting gaze. Many birds also make translatory head saccades (head bobbing) when walking. It is common for animals to use both eyes when locating food items ahead, but the use of binocular disparity for distance judgment is rare, and has only been demonstrated in toads, owls, cats and primates. Smooth tracking with eyes alone is probably confined to primates. The extent of synchrony and directional symmetry in the movements of the two eyes varies greatly, from complete independence in the sandlance and chameleon, to perfect coordination in primates.

Indexed as

AnimalsEyeEye MovementsHead MovementsHumansReflexVision, Binocular

Identifiers

PMID25398576
OpenAlexW2064107956

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.