Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27558791›Full record

ArticleJournal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology2016

Visual motion detection and habitat preference in Anolis lizards.

David S Steinberg, Manuel Leal

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The Visual Ecology ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Review
  2. Temporal vision: measures, mechanisms and meaning.The Journal of experimental biology · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Motion-based signaling in sympatric species of Australian agamid lizards.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2017
    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

2 authors.

David S SteinbergDepartment of Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. lucypenn@email.unc.edu.
Manuel LealDivision of Biological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The perception of visual stimuli has been a major area of inquiry in sensory ecology, and much of this work has focused on coloration. However, for visually oriented organisms, the process of visual motion detection is often equally crucial to survival and reproduction. Despite the importance of motion detection to many organisms' daily activities, the degree of interspecific variation in the perception of visual motion remains largely unexplored. Furthermore, the factors driving this potential variation (e.g., ecology or evolutionary history) along with the effects of such variation on behavior are unknown. We used a behavioral assay under laboratory conditions to quantify the visual motion detection systems of three species of Puerto Rican Anolis lizard that prefer distinct structural habitat types. We then compared our results to data previously collected for anoles from Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Central America. Our findings indicate that general visual motion detection parameters are similar across species, regardless of habitat preference or evolutionary history. We argue that these conserved sensory properties may drive the evolution of visual communication behavior in this clade.

Indexed as

EcosystemAnimalsBiological EvolutionLizardsMotion PerceptionPhotic StimulationPuerto RicoSpecies SpecificityAnolisEcologyMotion detectionSensory responseVision

Identifiers

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.