Shaping an optical dome: The size and shape of the insect compound eye

Eye morphology in four species of tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae)

Compound eyes undoubtedly represent the widespread eye architecture in the animal kingdom. The insects' compound eye shows a wide variety of designs, and insects use their visual capacity to accomplish several tasks, including avoiding enemies, searching for food and shelter, locating a mate, and acquiring information about the environment and its surroundings. Broad literature data support the concept that visual ability lies in the way the eyes are built. Since the resolution and sensitivity of the compound eye are partly determined by the density of the ommatidia and the size of the facets. Morphological parameters of the compound eyes could influence the function of the visual organ and its capacity to process information, also representing a sensitive indicator of different habitat demands. In this study, we compared compound eyes' parameters in four closely related species of tiger beetles to disclose differences arising from different habitats. Furthermore, to investigate whether there are consistent intersexual differences, we also compared the most relevant parameters of the eye in males and females of four selected species. Our results show sex-related and interspecific differences that occur in examined species.

Evolution of compound eye morphology underlies differences in vision between closely related Drosophila species

BACKGROUND

Insects have evolved complex visual systems and display an astonishing range of adaptations for diverse ecological niches. Species of Drosophila melanogaster subgroup exhibit extensive intra- and interspecific differences in compound eye size. These differences provide an excellent opportunity to better understand variation in insect eye structure and the impact on vision. Here we further explored the difference in eye size between D. mauritiana and its sibling species D. simulans.

RESULTS

We confirmed that D. mauritiana have rapidly evolved larger eyes as a result of more and wider ommatidia than D. simulans since they recently diverged approximately 240,000 years ago. The functional impact of eye size, and specifically ommatidia size, is often only estimated based on the rigid surface morphology of the compound eye. Therefore, we used 3D synchrotron radiation tomography to measure optical parameters in 3D, predict optical capacity, and compare the modelled vision to in vivo optomotor responses. Our optical models predicted higher contrast sensitivity for D. mauritiana, which we verified by presenting sinusoidal gratings to tethered flies in a flight arena. Similarly, we confirmed the higher spatial acuity predicted for Drosophila simulans with smaller ommatidia and found evidence for higher temporal resolution.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that even subtle differences in ommatidia size between closely related Drosophila species can impact the vision of these insects. Therefore, further comparative studies of intra- and interspecific variation in eye morphology and the consequences for vision among other Drosophila species, other dipterans and other insects are needed to better understand compound eye structure-function and how the diversification of eye size, shape, and function has helped insects to adapt to the vast range of ecological niches.