The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Optimization, Constraint, and History in the Evolution of Eyes
Abstract
Several features of the evolution of eyes and photoreceptors are examined in an effort to explore the relative roles of adaptation and historical and developmental constraints. Optical design shows clear evidence of adaptation, which in some respects approaches optima predictable from physics. The primate fovea, on the other hand, illustrates how adaptation can be channeled by developmental heritage. The primary structures of opsins reveal multiple evolutionary lineages within both Drosophila and humans. The pigments of vertebrae rods comprise a subset of opsins whose evolutionary relationships map onto the phylogeny of the parent species. The evolutionary reasons for why most rod pigments absorb maximally at 500 +/- 10 nm are obscure, as there is no convincing explanation based on adaptation alone. Rods are appropriately distinguished from cones on the basis of which opsin gene is expressed. This criterion is likely to be in conflict with other definitions in phyletic lines (e.g., geckos, snakes) that have long diurnal or nocturnal histories accompanied by loss of one or more opsin genes, followed by a secondary adaptation to life in a different photic environment. Color vision--a generalizable perception associated with the spectral composition of light--is usefully distinguished from wavelength-specific behaviors. The latter are also based on multiple visual pigments and more than one spectral class of receptors but cannot be altered by learning. The distinction is particularly forceful in bees, which exhibit both kinds of behavior. The evolution of primate color vision has been shaped by historical factors involving an extensive period of early mammalian nocturnality. Birds, by contrast, have more elaborate cones and a richer set of visual pigments. Avian color space can be represented in a tetrahedron.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Signals, Signal Conditions, and the Direction of Evolution
Endler, J. A. (1992) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/285308 · Cited by 1,960
A pessimistic estimate of the time required for an eye to evolve
(1994) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.1994.0048 · Cited by 425
Plumage Reflectance and the Objective Assessment of Avian Sexual Dichromatism
Cuthill, I. C., Bennett, A. T. D., Partridge, J. C., & Maier, E. J. (1999) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/303160 · Cited by 391
Seeing, Doing, and Knowing: A Philosophical Theory of Sense Perception
Matthen, M. (2005) · doi:10.1093/0199268509.001.0001 · Cited by 333
The last common bilaterian ancestor
Erwin, D. H., & Davidson, E. H. (2002) · Development · doi:10.1242/dev.129.13.3021 · Cited by 320
Metadata
- Authors
- Goldsmith, T. H.
- Venue
- The Quarterly Review of Biology
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1990-09
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 281-322
- ISSN
- 0033-5770 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-7718
- OpenAlex
- W2072858912
- Cited by
- 632
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.18
- 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: Optimization, Constraint, and History in the Evolution of Eyes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/416840
- The paper
- Goldsmith, T. H. (1990). Optimization, Constraint, and History in the Evolution of Eyes. The Quarterly Review of Biology. https://doi.org/10.1086/416840
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.