[Q] Visual detection of moving vs. stat

xxx jon at nsi.edu
Mon Mar 28 21:16:43 EST 1994


In article 240394231232 at girch46.med.uth.tmc.edu, chickie at girch1.med.uth.tmc.edu (chris hickie) writes:
> In article <Cn4B95.41L at midge.bath.ac.uk>, ee0mlf at midge.bath.ac.uk (M L
> Fogg) wrote:
> > 
> > Michael Hucka wrote:
> > 
> > >1) Does anyone know of any creature that... ...cannot sense visual motion?
> >  
> > No, but on the flip side, I've heard that frogs are far better at detecting
> > moving objects than they are at detecting stationary ones.  Yummy flies are
> > always moving when they get eaten.
> > 
> > Martyn
> 
> Toads can't locate their food unless it is moving.  One night I bounced
> some small paper wads around this one toad.  He only ate the ones that
> were still bouncing when they went by his head.  Then he'd spit
> them out, but I didn't feel expanding my study to feeding.  I guess
> you could fish for amphibians this way.  I wonder if most fish
> are like this as well in terms of the type of bait they will
> strike (stationary vs. moving)
> 
> 
> Chris


In my teenage experience of fishing (freshwater in England) the tendency of fish to
go for stationary or moving stimuli was very species specific and also dependant on
time of year, which probably means water temperature. In general moving bait probably
tempted a greater variety of fish but with some still bait was very much an advantage.
This included bottom feeding fish and fish that seemed to use smell to find food (such
as eels). To be generic, I would say (from my limited laymans position of being a
fisherman) that most fish would go for both moving or non-moving stimuli but there
are definated preferences within species, water conditions (eg dark, murky or clear)
and temperature.

Jonny Wray






More information about the Neur-sci mailing list