Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34282724›Full record

ArticleeLife2021

Conserved visual capacity of rats under red light.

Nader Nikbakht, Mathew E Diamond

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Echolocating free-tailed bats use vision and hearing but not magnetoreception when navigating a maze.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Context features influence alcohol reward and motivation.Alcohol, clinical & experimental research · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

2 authors.

Nader NikbakhtTactile Perception and Learning Lab, International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA), Trieste, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9726-9115
Mathew E DiamondTactile Perception and Learning Lab, International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA), Trieste, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2286-4566

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent studies examine the behavioral capacities of rats and mice with and without visual input, and the neuronal mechanisms underlying such capacities. These animals are assumed to be functionally blind under red light, an assumption that might originate in the fact that they are dichromats who possess ultraviolet and green cones, but not red cones. But the inability to see red as a color does not necessarily rule out form vision based on red light absorption. We measured Long-Evans rats' capacity for visual form discrimination under red light of various wavelength bands. Upon viewing a black and white grating, they had to distinguish between two categories of orientation: horizontal and vertical. Psychometric curves plotting judged orientation versus angle demonstrate the conserved visual capacity of rats under red light. Investigations aiming to explore rodent physiological and behavioral functions in the absence of visual input should not assume red-light blindness.

Indexed as

LightAnimalsBlindnessColor PerceptionDiscrimination, PsychologicalRatsRats, Long-EvansVision, OcularVisual Perceptionbehaviorform perceptionmiceneuroscienceratratsred lightvision

Identifiers

PMID34282724
PMCPMC8360654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.