Open the tool

How does the elephant hawk-moth see?

The elephant hawk-moth (Deilephila elpenor) is a insect in the order Lepidoptera. Its eyes belong to the vision type Colour or navigation at night.

Measured in this species: colour, sharpness 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.

See your photo as the elephant hawk-mothThis species is part of the full catalogue in the tool (full unlock). Your photo stays on your device.

What stands out

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 elephant hawk-moth (Deilephila elpenor), catalogue-v1
DialValueEvidenceSources
ColourColour receptors
3 receptor classes: 346.2 nm (UVS), 442.5 nm (SWS (blue)), 521.2 nm (MWS (green))
measured in this species
Measured[1][2]
Ultraviolet
yes: at least one receptor peaks in the ultraviolet
Measured
SharpnessAcuity
0.25 cycles per degree
median of 1 compilation rows (method priority rule)
Measured[3]
Angle between facets
1.42°
minimum (acute-zone) interommatidial angle over sources; within currea2023_oda: minimum (round-1 rule: mean of horizontal and vertical when both exist)
Measured (not re-verified)[4]
Eye type
compound eye
Field of viewNo value in the catalogue.
Sharp zones (foveas)Number of foveas
0
median of 91 relatives in class Insecta: Empis prodromus, Rhamphomyia albidiventris, Rhamphomyia breviventris, Rhamphomyia maculipennis, Rhamphomyia marginata, Rhamphomyia murina
Group default[5]
Fovea type
none
Group default[5]
Night visionActivity pattern
nocturnal
mode of 1 rows (of 1 rows): nocturnal
Measured[1]
Rods vs cones
no rods (invertebrate photoreceptors)
nocturnal -> rod-dominated; crepuscular / cathemeral / mixed -> mixed; diurnal -> cone-dominated
Derived[1]
Motion (flicker fusion)Flicker fusion frequency
126.85 Hz
median of 6 relatives in family Sphingidae: Daphnis nerii, Acherontia styx, Agrius convolvuli, Cephonodes hylas, Macroglossum limata, Psilogramma increta
Estimated[6][7]

Related animals

More insects: all insects with measured vision data.

Sources

  1. 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
  2. van der Kooi CJ, Stavenga DG, Arikawa K, Belusic G, Kelber A. 2021. Evolution of insect color vision: from spectral sensitivity to visual ecology. Annu Rev Entomol 66:435-461. Supplementary table. doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-061720-071644
  3. Feller KD, Sharkey CR, McDuffee-Altekruse A, Bracken-Grissom HD, Lord NP, Porter ML, Schweikert LE 2021. Surf and turf vision: patterns and predictors of visual acuity in compound eye evolution. Arthropod Structure & Development 60:101002. doi.org/10.1016/j.asd.2020.101002
  4. Currea JP, Sondhi Y, Kawahara AY, Theobald J. 2023. Measuring compound eye optics with microscope and microCT images. Commun Biol 6:246
  5. Comparative data for dance fly eye morphology and female ornamentation (Empididae). Data: Dryad doi:10.5061/dryad.rr4xgxd5z. doi.org/10.5061/dryad.rr4xgxd5z
  6. 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
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. 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

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