How does the Picasso triggerfish see?

The Picasso triggerfish (Rhinecanthus aculeatus) is a fish in the order Tetraodontiformes. Its eyes belong to the vision type Shallow-water fish tetrachromat: 4 cones incl. UV and far-red; archerfish and four-eyed fish add dual-medium optics.

Measured in this species: colour and sharpness. Measured colour or sharpness: a measured receptor set or acuity in this species; other dials come from relatives or group defaults. 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 Picasso triggerfish's eyes, using the values in the table below. — The same scene rendered for the Picasso triggerfish (60° field of view, daylight).

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

What stands out

It has three colour receptor classes, like most people.
Its sharpest vision resolves 1.75 cycles per degree: the finest stripe pattern it can tell apart from grey.
Both eyes see the same 32.7° in front of it (binocular overlap), where depth is judged best.
It stops seeing flicker at 42.8 Hz, against 60 Hz for people in this dataset, so fast motion looks choppier to it.^[7][8]
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 Picasso triggerfish (Rhinecanthus aculeatus), catalogue-v1
Dial	Value	Evidence	Sources
Colour	Colour receptors 3 receptor classes: 413 nm (VS/SWS (violet)), 480 nm (MWS (green)), 528 nm (MWS (green)) species-v1.csv value measured in this species (not in tidy tables)	Measured (not re-verified)	^[1]
Sharpness	Acuity 1.75 cycles per degree median of 1 behavioural rows (method priority rule)	Measured	^[2]
Field of view	Binocular overlap 32.7° group default: median of tier-A values in vision type V18 within phylum Chordata (1 species: Danio rerio)	Group default	^[3]
Field of view	Eye placement lateral	Group default	^[3]
Sharp zones (foveas)	Number of foveas 0 group default: mode of tier-A values in vision type V18 within phylum Chordata (2 species: Toxotes jaculatrix, Anableps anableps)	Group default	^[4][5]
Sharp zones (foveas)	Fovea type ventrotemporal area (high rgc density)	Group default	^[4][5]
Night vision	Activity pattern diurnal group default: mode of tier-A values in vision type V18 within phylum Chordata (1 species: Amphiprion ocellaris)	Group default	^[6]
Night vision	Rods vs cones cone-dominated	Group default	^[6]
Motion (flicker fusion)	Flicker fusion frequency 42.8 Hz group default: median of tier-A values in vision type V18 within phylum Chordata (4 species: Carassius auratus, Danio rerio, Poecilia reticulata, Oncorhynchus mykiss)	Group default	^{[7][8][9][10]}

Related animals

Black scraper same vision type
Boomerang triggerfish same vision type
Bullseye puffer same vision type
Clown triggerfish same vision type
Degen's leatherjacket same vision type
Fantail filefish same vision type

More fish: all fish with measured vision data.

Sources

species_v1:Pignatelli et al. 2010
Caves EM, Sutton TT, Johnsen S (2017) Visual acuity in ray-finned fishes correlates with eye size and habitat. J Exp Biol 220:1586-1596. Table S1.. doi.org/10.1242/jeb.151183
Pita D, Moore BA, Tyrrell LP, Fernandez-Juricic E. 2015. Vision in two cyprinid fish: implications for collective behavior. PeerJ 3:e1113.. doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1113
species_v1:Schwab et al. 2001
species_v1:Temple et al. 2010
Froese R. & Pauly D. (eds). FishBase, snapshot v25.04 (morphmet, morphdat, species, families tables), distributed as parquet by C. Boettiger for rfishbase.. fishbase.org
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
species_v1:Patterson et al. 2002 (via Lafitte et al. 2022)

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