Blowfly vs fruit fly: how their vision differs
Two animals people expect to see alike, or very differently. Here are their values side by side, from the same catalogue and with the same evidence labels.
The differences in numbers
- The blowfly has 5 colour receptor classes and the fruit fly 7.
- The blowfly resolves finer detail: 0.45 vs 0.125 cycles per degree, about 3.6 times finer.
- Flicker fusion: 240 Hz for the blowfly, 57 Hz for the fruit fly. The higher value sees fast motion in finer time steps.
Dial by dial
| Dial | Blowfly | Fruit fly |
|---|---|---|
| Colour | Colour receptors: 5 receptor classes: 335 nm (UVS), 357.5 nm (UVS), 460 nm (SWS (blue)), 490 nm (MWS (green)), 530 nm (MWS (green)) Measured[1] Ultraviolet: yes: at least one receptor peaks in the ultraviolet Measured | Colour receptors: 7 receptor classes: 331 nm (UVS), 345 nm (UVS), 371.5 nm (UVS), 440 nm (SWS (blue)), 480 nm (MWS (green)), 508 nm (MWS (green)), 520 nm (MWS (green)) Measured (not re-verified)[2][3][1][4][5] Ultraviolet: yes: at least one receptor peaks in the ultraviolet Measured (not re-verified) |
| Sharpness | Acuity: 0.45 cycles per degree Measured[6] Angle between facets: 1.1° Measured[6] Eye type: compound eye | Acuity: 0.125 cycles per degree Measured[6] Angle between facets: 3.38° Measured[6] Eye type: compound eye |
| Field of view | No value | No value |
| Sharp zones (foveas) | Number of foveas: 0 Group default[7] Fovea type: none Group default[7] | Number of foveas: 0 Group default[7] Fovea type: none Group default[7] |
| Night vision | ||
| Motion (flicker fusion) | Flicker fusion frequency: 240 Hz Estimated[9] | Flicker fusion frequency: 57 Hz Measured[10] |
Vision types: Blowfly: Fast fly (slow-motion world). Fruit fly: Fast fly (slow-motion world).
More comparisons: all comparisons.
Sources
- 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
- 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
- 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
- Kirwan J. luxR 0.1.1: Underwater Light Analysis and Visual Ecology (R-universe), data species_sensitivities. github.com/JohnKirwan/luxR
- Porter ML et al. 2006 Table 1 (opsin accessions with lambda max; mostly cephalopod/arthropod) as extracted by VPOD. github.com/VisualPhysiologyDB/visual-physiology-opsin-db
- 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
- Comparative data for dance fly eye morphology and female ornamentation (Empididae). Data: Dryad doi:10.5061/dryad.rr4xgxd5z. doi.org/10.5061/dryad.rr4xgxd5z
- Feuda R, Marletaz F, Bentley MA, Holland PWH. 2016. Conservation, duplication, and divergence of five opsin genes in insect evolution. Genome Biol Evol 8:579-587
- 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
- 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
Renders use the sample scene at a 60° field of view in daylight. Evidence levels: how the tiers work.