Search

Raptors from the orders Accipitriformes and Falconiformes have been considered to rely principally on vision. Historically, this assumption has led scientists to discount any possible sense of smell in these birds, until work on cathartid vultures indicated that these species at least rely on olfaction to find carrion. In this review I provide evidence that raptors in general have functional olfactory systems that they may use in a range of different contexts. Anatomical studies show that raptors have well-developed olfactory bulbs that are within the range of other bird species. Furthermore, all raptors studied have multiple functional olfactory genes, with, for instance, 283 olfactory genes in the Oriental honey buzzard, Pernis orientalis , of which 81.5% are functional. It has also been shown that some raptors species may functionally use olfactory cues to forage and, potentially, for communication. While further research is required, the available evidence suggests that olfaction may be a more important sensory modality in these birds than previously thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Raptors are usually considered to be mainly visually dependent, and the use of other sensory modalities has rarely been studied in these birds. Here, we investigated experimentally which senses (vision and/or olfaction) Turkey vultures (Cathartes aura) and Southern caracaras (Caracara plancus) use to find hidden food. First, two identical stainless-steel perforated balls, one containing a putrefied piece of meat and the other an odorless control, were presented to birds in binary choice experiments. Both species interacted more with the smelling ball than with the control, suggesting that they were attracted by the odor of the hidden meat. In a second experiment, individuals were accustomed to eat in one specifically colored ball (blue or green). In the test phase, the meat was hidden in the opposite color with respect to the one each bird had become accustomed to. Vultures still interacted more with the smelly ball disregarding the color, while caracaras interacted equally with the two balls. The prevalence of olfaction in Turkey vultures may partly explain why they are the first raptors to find carcasses in tropical forests. In contrast, caracaras forage on the ground opportunistically, a strategy where both olfaction and sight may be involved. Our experiments suggest that both species are able to use olfactory cues for foraging. However, olfaction could be the predominant sense in Turkey vultures while olfaction and sight could play an equivalent role in Southern caracaras. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Significant interspecific differences in avian vision occur, even in congeneric species, and these have been correlated with differences in the perceptual challenges associated with foraging. Although diurnal raptors are assumed to be mainly visually guided in their foraging, they differ markedly in their foraging tactics and this may result in different visual demands. Among the Falconidae (Falconiformes), most falcons forage mainly on the wing for highly mobile prey, whereas caracaras forage on the ground for carrion and insects. We assessed whether Saker Falcon Falco cherrug and Southern Caracara Caracara plancus differ in their visual abilities by determining the visual fields and foveal characteristics of both species. Using an ophthalmoscopic reflex technique, we found a higher degree of binocular overlap in the caracaras than in the falcons. The high binocular overlap (47°) of the Southern Caracara may facilitate object manipulation (e.g. moving rocks) when foraging. We used an ultra-high resolution spectral-domain optical coherence tomography to determine foveal characteristics. We found two foveas (depressions in the retina where high visual resolution is expected) in the falcons (one central and one temporal) but only a central fovea in the caracaras. The presence of a shallower temporal fovea in Saker Falcons may help to fixate visually upon a highly mobile prey item during pursuit. We conclude that these differences in visual field configurations and foveal characteristics reflect different foraging demands, suggesting that the extraction of visual information is finely tuned to the demands of their foraging tactics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The binocular field of vision differs widely in birds depending on ecological traits such as foraging. Owls (Strigiformes) have been considered to have a unique binocular field, but whether it is related to foraging has remained unknown. While taking into account allometry and phylogeny, we hypothesized that both daily activity cycle and diet determine the size and shape of the binocular field in owls. Here, we compared the binocular field configuration of 23 species of owls. While we found no effect of allometry and phylogeny, ecological traits strongly influence the binocular field shape and size. Binocular field shape of owls significantly differed from that of diurnal raptors. Among owls, binocular field shape was relatively conserved, but binocular field size differed among species depending on ecological traits, with larger binocular fields in species living in dense habitat and foraging on invertebrates. Our results suggest that (i) binocular field shape is associated with the time of foraging in the daily cycle (owls versus diurnal raptors) and (ii) that binocular field size differs between closely related owl species even though the general shape is conserved, possibly because the field of view is partially restricted by feathers, in a trade-off with auditory localization.

Wide variation in visual field configuration across avian species is hypothesized to be driven primarily by foraging ecology and predator detection. While some studies of selected taxa have identified relationships between foraging ecology and binocular field characteristics in particular species, few have accounted for the relevance of shared ancestry. We conducted a large-scale, comparative analysis across 39 Anatidae species to investigate the relationship between the foraging ecology traits of diet or behaviour and binocular field parameters, while controlling for phylogeny. We used phylogenetic models to examine correlations between traits and binocular field characteristics, using unidimensional and morphometric approaches. We found that foraging behaviour influenced three parameters of binocular field size: maximum binocular field width, vertical binocular field extent, and angular separation between the eye-bill projection and the direction of maximum binocular field width. Foraging behaviour and body mass each influenced two descriptors of binocular field shape. Phylogenetic relatedness had minimal influence on binocular field size and shape, apart from vertical binocular field extent. Binocular field differences are associated with specific foraging behaviours, as related to the perceptual challenges of obtaining different food items from aquatic and terrestrial environments.