Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 313

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The UV visual world of fishes: a review

Losey, G·1999·Journal of Fish Biology

Abstract

Ultraviolet-A radiation (320–400 nm) is scattered rapidly in water. Despite this fact, UV is present in biologically useful amounts to at least 100 m deep in clear aquatic environments. Discovery of UV visual pigments with peak absorption at around 360 nm in teleost cone photoreceptors indicates that many teleost fishes may be adapted for vision in the UV range. Considering the characteristic absorption curve for visual pigments, about 18% of the downwelling light that illuminates objects at 30-m depth would be available to UV-sensitive cones. Strong scattering of UV radiation should produce unique imaging conditions as a very bright UV background in the horizontal view and a marked veiling effect that, with distance, obscures an image. Many teleosts have three, or even four, classes of cone cells mediating colour vision in their retina and one can be sensitive to UV. These UV-sensitive cones contain a visual pigment based on a unique opsin which is highly conserved between fish species. Several powerful methods exist for demonstration of UV vision, but all are rather demanding in terms of technique and equipment. Demonstration that the eye lacks UV-blocking compounds that are present in many fish eyes is a simpler method that can indicate the possibility of UV vision. The only experimental evidence for the use of UV vision by fishes is connected to planktivory: detection of UV-opaque objects at close range against a bright UV background is enhanced by the physical properties of UV light. Once present, perhaps for the function of detecting food, UV vision may well be co-opted through natural selection for other functions. Recent discovery that UV vision is critically important for mate choice in some birds and lizards is a strong object lesson for fish ecologists and behaviourists. Other possible functions amount to far more than merely adding a fourth dimension to the visible spectrum. Since UV is scattered so effectively in water, it may be useful for social signalling at short range and reduce the possibility of detection by other, illegitimate, receivers. Since humans are blind to UV light, we may be significantly in error, in many cases, in our attempts to understand and evaluate visual aspects of fish behaviour. A survey of the reflectance properties of skin pigments in fishes reveals a rich array of pigments with reflectance peaks in the UV. For example, the same yellow to our eyes may comprise two perceptually different colours to fish, yellow and UV-yellow. It is clearly necessary for us to anticipate that many fishes may have some form of UV vision.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/jfbi.1998.0919

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 59 references

Cited by

See all 313

Metadata

Authors
Losey, G.
Venue
Journal of Fish Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1999-05
Volume
54
Issue
5
Pages
921-943
ISSN
0022-1112 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2165793490
Cited by
313
References
59
FWCI
3.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The UV visual world of fishes: a review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1006/jfbi.1998.0919
The paper
Losey, G. (1999). The UV visual world of fishes: a review. Journal of Fish Biology. https://doi.org/10.1006/jfbi.1998.0919

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.