The effect of viewing distance upon size preference of frogs for prey

Ingle, Dwight J.; Cook, Jeffrey

doi:10.1016/0042-6989(77)90003-7

Cited by 55 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This general point is supported by additional studies in our laboratory with the frog (Ingle and Cook, 1977) in which sizeconstancy data very similar to those of Ewert and Gebauer were obtained. For example, as Figure 5 shows, frogs prefer 6° objects when these are only 3 in.…”

Section: Lettvin's Classification Of Retinal Ganglion Cells In the Frogsupporting

confidence: 71%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prey Selection by Frogs and Toads

Ingle

1983

Motivation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Lettvin's Classification Of Retinal Ganglion Cells In the Frogsupporting

confidence: 71%

“…Can response readiness be linked to viewing distance as well? Ingle and Cook (1977) made this connection via the demonstation tthat frogs prefer to snap at 3° prey objects when these are 3 in. rather than 6 in.…”

Section: Lettvin's Classification Of Retinal Ganglion Cells In the Frogmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prey Selection by Frogs and Toads

Ingle

1983

Motivation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…that preferences were for the same "real size." This rule was more rigorously established by size-constancy experiments with toads (Ewert & Gebauer 1973) and with frogs (Ingle & Cook 1977). It is important to realize that the tendency of these animals to snap preferentially at very large angle (20 deg) stimuli when very close cannot be explained by a selective response of tectal cells to superfi cial "small spot detector" units .…”

Section: Case Study 4: Role Of the Anuran Optic Tectum In Prey-catchingmentioning

confidence: 92%

Vertebrate Neuroethology: Definitions and Paradigms

Ingle¹,

Crews²

1985

Annu. Rev. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTIONNeuroethology has its historical origins in three scientifi c disciplines: com parative neuroanatomy, comparative and physiological psychology, and com parative ethology. Neuroethology, however, avoids the emphasis on structure characteristic of comparative neuroanatomy and on task-oriented problems popular with psychologists, while drawing heavily on behavioral adaptations, the hallmark of comparative ethological investigations. Neuroethological stud ies measure an animal's competence, not its capabilities, by testing the organ ism under naturalistic conditions rather than under artifi cial conditions that may give rise to misleading results . Although the boundaries of neuroethology are arbitrary, its focus is on complex behaviors and not on simple reflexes such as coughing and eye-wiping. Instead of determining how simple reflexes become organized, integrated, and synthesized to form the foundation of com plex behaviors (cf Te itelbaum et al 1983), neuroethological studies begin with the behavioral sequence itself, concentrating on motivated or goal-directed behaviors that have adaptive value .Behavior is best viewed as the fi nal common pathway in a dynamic process involving the organism's external and internal milieux. One can arbitrarily divide this complex interaction into four aspects: 457 o 147-006X/85/030 1 -0457$02.00Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 1985.8:457-494. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org by Indiana University -Purdue University Indianapolis -IUPUI on 10/17/12. For personal use only. Quick links to online content Further ANNUAL REVIEWS 458 INGLE & CREWS 1. the way in which the organism has become sensitive to certain physical,biotic, and social factors as key stimuli; 2. the mechanisms by which these stimuli are presented and integrated within the brain; 3. how this representation of the environment results in changes in the organ ism's internal state; 4. how those physiological changes in the internal milieu influence the manner in which the organism interacts with its environment.Superimposed on these physiological issues is the ethologist's traditional con cern for development, ecological fitness, and evolutionary history. Because one's definition of "neuroethology" depends upon one's definition of ethology, it seems useful to begin this review by identifying the questions raised by ethologists concerning the mechanisms of behavior and discussing their methods for description and analysis of behavior. Certainly, ethologists focus their attention upon the behavior of animals in nature or within laboratory environments where natural behaviors easily emerge. Ethological studies are typically concerned with (a) natural stimuli that elicit biologically important behaviors such as feeding, fleeing, courtship, and fighting; (b) the spatiotem poral structure of ensuing action pattens (pursuit, biting, threatening, calling, etc), and (c) the motivational, developmental, and physiological conditionsthat determine which alternative response is likely to be elicited by a given sct of cxtcrnal stim...

show abstract

“…This is true whether the barrier is limited to the frontal binocular field or is wider and extends into the lateral monocular fields [Ingle, 1983]. When challenged with a looming stimulus from the rear, leopard frogs can move through gaps in vertical opaque barriers [Ingle and Cook, 1977]. Their choice of leaping through or going around a gap depends on the visual angle of the gap not the actual size of the gap.…”

Section: Evidence Showing Frogs Can See Stationary Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognition of Apertures in Overhead Transparent Barriers by Leopard Frogs

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anurans have independent systems for detecting moving stimuli and stationary opaque objects. We have discovered that leopard frogs will also orient to, and spontaneously and accurately jump through, circular apertures in overhead transparent covers. When given a choice between one large aperture of 3.8 cm diameter, and three apertures of smaller but equal diameter (2.5 cm diameter, 1.9 cm diameter, or 1.3 cm diameter) they choose the larger diameter aperture at a frequency (64, 87 and 97%, respectively) that is statistically greater than chance. In only 1 of 255 attempts was there a jump to the overhead cover that was not directed at an aperture. Atectal frogs are still able to detect and jump accurately through transparent apertures. Frogs cannot distinguish between two apertures of equal diameter if one aperture is covered with clear plastic with high light transmissibility (92% of transmissibility of air). However, if the plastic covering of the aperture has a residue which reduces light through the cover from 92 to 87% of the transmissibility of air, frogs will jump to the uncovered aperture at a frequency that is statistically greater than chance. Our results show that leopard frogs have an extremely well developed ability to detect overhead apertures just as they can vertical obstacles. They are able to jump towards such openings with a small margin of error independent of the tectal visual system.

show abstract

The effect of viewing distance upon size preference of frogs for prey

Cited by 55 publications

References 18 publications

Prey Selection by Frogs and Toads

Prey Selection by Frogs and Toads

Vertebrate Neuroethology: Definitions and Paradigms

Recognition of Apertures in Overhead Transparent Barriers by Leopard Frogs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About