How does the helmet gecko see?
The helmet gecko (Tarentola chazaliae) is a reptile in the order not recorded. Its eyes belong to the vision type Colour or navigation at night.
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 helmet geckoThis 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, but one of them sees ultraviolet.
- It stops seeing flicker at 34.6 Hz, against 60 Hz for people in this dataset, so fast motion looks choppier to it.[9][10]
- Activity pattern: nocturnal.
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.
| Dial | Value | Evidence | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
| Colour | Colour receptors 3 receptor classes: 360 nm (UVS), 440 nm (SWS (blue)), 520 nm (MWS (green)) measured in this species | Measured | [1][2] |
| Ultraviolet yes: at least one receptor peaks in the ultraviolet | Measured | ||
| Sharpness | No value in the catalogue. | ||
| Field of view | No value in the catalogue. | ||
| Sharp zones (foveas) | Number of foveas 2 mode of species-v1 relatives in class Squamata: Anolis carolinensis, Furcifer pardalis | Group default | [3][4] |
| Fovea type central fovea, temporal | Group default | [3][4] | |
| Night vision | Activity pattern nocturnal mode of 4 rows (of 4 rows): Nocturnal; nocturnal; scotopic | Measured (not re-verified) | [1][5][6][7] |
| Rods vs cones rod-dominated nocturnal -> rod-dominated; crepuscular / cathemeral / mixed -> mixed; diurnal -> cone-dominated | Derived | [1][5][6][7] | |
| Motion (flicker fusion) | Flicker fusion frequency 34.6 Hz median of 15 relatives in class Squamata: Phrynosoma cornutum, Sphaerodactylus inaguae, Anolis cristatellus, Anolis gundlachi, Anolis pulchellus, Iguana iguana | Group default | [8][9][10][11] |
Related animals
- Tokay gecko same vision type
- Inagua least gecko same vision type
- Indo-Pacific gecko same vision type
- Elephant hawk-moth same vision type
- Hummingbird hawk-moth same vision type
- Nocturnal sweat bee same vision type
More reptiles: all reptiles with measured vision data.
Sources
- 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
- VPOD in-vivo (MSP / single-cell) lambda max compendium, file scp_cleaned.csv, VPOD GitHub (Frazer et al. 2025 bioRxiv 10.1101/2025.08.22.671864). github.com/VisualPhysiologyDB/visual-physiology-opsin-db/tree/main/scripts_n_notebooks/vpod_ML_workflows/mine_n_match/data_sources/lmax/vpod
- species_v1:Fleishman et al. 1988 / Makaretz & Levine 1980
- species_v1:Ott & Schaeffel 1995
- Schmitz L, Motani R. 2011. Science 332:705-708, SOM. doi.org/10.1126/science.1200043
- Meiri 2024. SquamBase: a database of squamate (Reptilia: Squamata) traits. Global Ecol Biogeogr (data Zenodo 10602503).. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10602503
- 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
- 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?