How does the Canada goose see?

The Canada goose (Branta canadensis) is a bird in the order Anseriformes. Its eyes belong to the vision type Panoramic grain-eater and wader: 4 cones (violet-sensitive), low-moderate acuity, ~300-360 deg field, small binocular zone.

Measured in this species: sharpness, field of view, foveas and night vision. Measured core: measured values on at least 3 of the 6 dials. Every value below carries its evidence level and sources; nothing is typed by hand.

Sample scene drawn in code: a face with red lips, a green shirt, red and green apples, flowers and a colour strip, as a person sees it. — The sample scene as a person sees it.

The same sample scene rendered by the See Like Animals engine for the Canada goose's eyes, using the values in the table below. — The same scene rendered for the Canada goose (60° field of view, daylight).

See your photo as the Canada gooseThis species is part of the full catalogue in the tool (full unlock). Your photo stays on your device.

What stands out

It has 4 colour receptor classes; people have 3.
Its sharpest vision resolves 13.25 cycles per degree: the finest stripe pattern it can tell apart from grey.
Its eyes cover about 306° around the head, with 22° seen by both eyes at once.
It stops seeing flicker at 88.5 Hz, against 60 Hz for people in this dataset, so fast motion looks about 1.5 times slower to it.^[14][15]
Activity pattern: diurnal.

The six dials

Evidence levels: how the tiers work. "Measured" means a value measured in this species; "Estimated" values come from a close relative or an eye-size formula.

Vision values for the Canada goose (Branta canadensis), catalogue-v1
Dial	Value	Evidence	Sources
Colour	Colour receptors 4 receptor classes: 417.5 nm (VS/SWS (violet)), 452 nm (SWS (blue)), 501 nm (MWS (green)), 570 nm (LWS (long)) receptor set of nearest measured relative Anas platyrhynchos (same family Anatidae)	Estimated	^[1][2]
Sharpness	Acuity 13.25 cycles per degree median of 2 anatomical-ganglion rows (method priority rule)	Measured	^[3][4]
Field of view	Binocular overlap 22° median of 1 rows (eyes-at-rest rows preferred)	Measured	^[5]
	Total field of view 306° median total field (measured, or 360 - blind area) of relatives in family Anatidae: Mergus merganser	Estimated	^[6]
	Blind area behind the head 54°	Estimated	^[6]
	Eye placement lateral frontal if binocular overlap >= 60 deg, else lateral	Derived	^[5]
Sharp zones (foveas)	Number of foveas 1 retinal topography	Measured (not re-verified)	^[7]
Sharp zones (foveas)	Fovea type single central fovea (displaced dorso-temporally from retinal centre)	Measured (not re-verified)	^[7]
Night vision	Activity pattern diurnal mode of 4 rows (of 4 rows): cathemeral; diurnal; not_nocturnal; photopic	Measured (not re-verified)	^{[8][9][10][11]}
Night vision	Rods vs cones cone-dominated nocturnal -> rod-dominated; crepuscular / cathemeral / mixed -> mixed; diurnal -> cone-dominated	Derived	^{[8][9][10][11]}
Motion (flicker fusion)	Flicker fusion frequency 88.5 Hz median of 17 relatives in class Aves: Bubo virginianus, Melopsittacus undulatus, Passer domesticus, Taeniopygia guttata, Columba livia, Calypte anna	Group default	^{[12][13][14][15][16]}

Related animals

Mallard same vision type
Greater scaup same vision type
Lesser scaup same vision type
Northern shoveler same vision type
American black duck same vision type
Barnacle goose same vision type

More birds: all birds with measured vision data.

Sources

Lind O, Mitkus M, Olsson P, Kelber A. 2014. Ultraviolet vision in birds: the importance of transparent eye media. Proc R Soc B 281:20132209. Table 1. doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.2209
Longcore T. 2023. A compendium of photopigment peak sensitivities and visual spectral response curves of terrestrial wildlife to guide design of outdoor nighttime lighting. Basic Appl Ecol 73:40-50. doi:10.1016/j.baae.2023.09.002. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8432720
Caves EM, Brandley NC, Johnsen S (2018) Visual acuity and the evolution of signals. Trends Ecol Evol 33:358-372. Supplementary Tables S1-S3.. doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2018.03.001
Caves EM, Fernandez-Juricic E, Kelley LA (2024) Ecological and morphological correlates of visual acuity in birds. J Exp Biol 227(2): jeb246063. Supplementary Table S1.. doi.org/10.1242/jeb.246063
Cantlay JC, Martin GR, McClelland SC, Potier S, O'Brien MF, Fernandez-Juricic E, Bond AL, Portugal SJ 2023. Binocular vision and foraging in ducks, geese and swans (Anatidae). Proc R Soc B 290: 20231213. ESM full data set (figshare collection 6781097).. doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2023.1213
Pecsics T, Csorgo T. 2023. Ornis Hungarica 31(2):110-124. doi.org/10.2478/orhu-2023-0023
Moore BA, Tyrrell LP, Pita D, Bininda-Emonds ORP, Fernandez-Juricic E 2017. Does retinal configuration make the head and eyes of foveate birds move? Sci Rep 7: 38406. Appendix 1.. doi.org/10.1038/srep38406
Light conditions and the evolution of the visual system in birds (figshare dataset, SupplementaryDataset1). doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.22116371.v3
Wilman H, Belmaker J, Simpson J, de la Rosa C, Rivadeneira MM, Jetz W. 2014. EltonTraits 1.0: species-level foraging attributes of the world's birds and mammals. Ecology 95:2027. BirdFuncDat.txt. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3559887.v1
Schmitz L, Motani R. 2011. Science 332:705-708, SOM. doi.org/10.1126/science.1200043
Moura et al. 2024. A phylogeny-informed characterisation of global tetrapod traits addresses data gaps and biases. PLoS Biol 22:e3002658. TetrapodTraits v3.0.1.. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22536349
Boström JE, Dimitrova M, Canton C, Håstad O, Qvarnström A, Ödeen A. 2016. Ultra-rapid vision in birds. PLoS ONE 11(3): e0151099. S1 Table. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151099
Haarlem CS, Hynes C, Jackson AL, Mitchell KJ, O'Connell RG, Healy K. 2026. Pace of ecology drives the tempo of visual perception across the animal kingdom. Nature Ecology & Evolution (doi:10.1038/s41559-026-02994-7). Figshare dataset 10.6084/m9.figshare.30556475. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30556475
Healy K, McNally L, Ruxton GD, Cooper N, Jackson AL. 2013. Metabolic rate and body size are linked with perception of temporal information. Animal Behaviour 86:685-696. Table 1. doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.06.018
Inger R, Bennie J, Davies TW, Gaston KJ. 2014. Potential biological and ecological effects of flickering artificial light. PLoS ONE 9(5): e98631. Table 3. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098631
Lafitte A, Sordello R, Legrand M, Nicolas V, Obein G, Reyjol Y. 2022. A flashing light may not be that flashy: A systematic review on critical fusion frequencies. PLoS ONE 17(12): e0279718. S10 File (CFF database). doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279718

Every value cites its sources (all sources). Data: catalogue-v1, built 2026-09-29. Accuracy notes: how accurate is this?