Open the tool

How does the south American coati see?

The south American coati (Nasua nasua) is a mammal in the order Carnivora. Its eyes belong to the vision type Day dichromat mammal.

Measured in this species: colour and night vision. 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.

See your photo as the south American coatiThis 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 south American coati (Nasua nasua), catalogue-v1
DialValueEvidenceSources
ColourColour receptors
2 receptor classes: 430 nm (VS/SWS (violet)), 555 nm (LWS (long))
measured in this species
Measured[1]
SharpnessAcuity
4.912 cycles per degree
median of 16 relatives in order Carnivora: Phoca vitulina, Felis catus, Acinonyx jubatus, Canis lupus, Crocuta crocuta, Enhydra lutris
Group default[2][3][4][5][6]
Field of viewBinocular overlap
88.5°
median of 4 relatives in order Carnivora: Canis lupus, Felis catus, Mustela putorius, Mustela nivalis
Group default[7][8]
Total field of view
250°
median species-v1 total field of order Carnivora: Canis familiaris
Group default[9]
Sharp zones (foveas)Number of foveas
0
median of 10 relatives in order Carnivora: Canis lupus, Vulpes lagopus, Acinonyx jubatus, Felis catus, Crocuta crocuta, Enhydra lutris
Group default[10]
Fovea type
area centralis, horizontal streak		Group default[10]
Night visionActivity pattern
diurnal
mode of 5 rows (of 5 rows): diurnal
Measured (not re-verified)[11][1][12][13][14]
Rods vs cones
cone-dominated
nocturnal -> rod-dominated; crepuscular / cathemeral / mixed -> mixed; diurnal -> cone-dominated
Derived[11][1][12][13][14]
Motion (flicker fusion)Flicker fusion frequency
76.25 Hz
median of 4 relatives in order Carnivora: Felis catus, Canis lupus, Pagophilus groenlandicus, Canis familiaris
Group default[15][16][17][18]

Related animals

More mammals: all mammals 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. 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
  3. de Sousa AA et al. 2022. A natural history of vision loss: insight from evolution for human visual function. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 134:104550 (mmc, acuity compilation). doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104550
  4. Kirk EC, Kay RF 2004. The evolution of high visual acuity in the Anthropoidea. In Anthropoid Origins, Table 1 (behavioural acuity). doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8873-7_20
  5. Kirk & Kay 2004 Table 2 (anatomical acuity). doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8873-7_20
  6. Veilleux CC, Kirk EC 2014. Visual acuity in mammals. Brain Behav Evol 83:43, Supplementary Table 1 (cleaned CSV in Evo-M1-Trait-Data). doi.org/10.1159/000357830
  7. Heesy CP 2004. On the relationship between orbit orientation and binocular visual field overlap in mammals. Anat Rec 281A:1104, Table 1. doi.org/10.1002/ar.a.20116
  8. Heffner RS, Heffner HE 1992. Visual factors in sound localization in mammals. J Comp Neurol 317:219, Table 1 (via Evo-M1 sensory merge). doi.org/10.1002/cne.903170302
  9. species_v1:Miller & Murphy 1995
  10. Kopania EEK, Clark NL. 2025. Mammalian retinal specializations for high acuity vision evolve in response to both foraging strategies and morphological constraints. Evolution Letters 9: qrae072. Supplementary Tables S1-S2.. doi.org/10.1093/evlett/qrae072
  11. Wilman et al. 2014 EltonTraits 1.0, MamFuncDat.txt. doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3559887.v1
  12. Maor R, Dayan T, Ferguson-Gow H, Jones KE. 2017. Temporal niche expansion in mammals from a nocturnal ancestor after dinosaur extinction. Nature Ecology & Evolution 1:1889-1895. Supplementary Table 1. doi.org/10.1038/s41559-017-0366-5
  13. Jones KE et al. 2009. PanTHERIA: a species-level database of life history, ecology, and geography of extant and recently extinct mammals. Ecology 90:2648. Ecological Archives E090-184. doi.org/10.1890/08-1494.1
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. 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
  17. 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
  18. 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?