Snakes see infrared light to detect warm objects in the dark (we can't see infrared because we have warm blood)
UV light is visible to birds and insects for mate choice + detecting patterns in flowers (we can't see UV because it damages our long-living eyes; it's partially filtered out)
ROYGBIV includes indigo because Newton wanted to show that there's 7 basic colours (like 7 basic musical notes; he was first to show light was a mix of different colours)
Problem of monochromatic vision; if a lower WVL was twice as intense, it would register the same as the peak WVL; you can't differentiate between intensity and WVL because your photoreceptor can only change its response in magnitude vs stimulus is different in 2 ways
The basis of colour TV: intensity of red, green and blue lights (these three colours correspond to retinal cone types) is changed to produce different colours
Different combinations of wavelengths that appear the same despite physically being different (meaning we're technically colour-blind; non-discriminance; great for colour TV because you only need 3 lights instead of a light for every colour)
Colour vision is useful if 2 cone types for very different WVLs (e.g. 550 nm - 420 nm/yellow-blue)
Colour difference tells you orientation (up/down) + helps differentiation (e.g. between vegetation)
Simple two-cone systems are effective enough to be widespread (especially in mammals; dogs, cats, bulls, etc.)
Introducing a second cone type would mean getting rid of existing cones ⇒ acuity compromisation (more cones = fine detail better perceived because more cells to compare inputs)
This second cone should be sparsely distributed on the retina; responds to coarse detail (no blue foveal cones for acuity + short WVLs are always out of focus in the eye)
Chromatic aberration→why blue/purple neon signs are always a bit fuzzy; common defect in most visual systems (low blue cone distribution to preserve foveal acuity; short WVLs don't register clearly)
Second/shorter WVL cone type wouldn't be in fovea ⇒ no foveal colour vision BUT luminance/intensity information + coarse colour info overlay allows differentiation between blue and yellow light
Before adding the 3rd cone, identify what tasks are obscured without this cone (e.g. finding red/yellow fruit from a background of dappled/mixed luminance foliage + detecting sexual readiness from faces or other parts in primates)
Red-green vision in primates has the advantage of obscuring the dappling (figure out that the foliage is all the same despite luminance difference) + makes the fruit stand out
30 - 40 m.y.a: yellow cone split into blue and red cones for sensitivity to short, medium and long WVLs
Red and green cones are similar in sensitivity
Trichromatic vision is rare in the animal kingdom; only really seen in humans and other primates (but can have +3; birds, shrimp, etc.)
~10% cones are blue with red cone majority; cone distribution in human retinas (lower acuity where S cones are)
Comparing the ratio of 2 cones regardless of luminance would give the same colour in a range of conditions (e.g. cones responding proportionally the same across luminance)
Opponent coding of colour: Theory that color vision is based on the coding of pairs of opponent colors: red-green, blue-yellow, and black-white
Cone/colour signal ratios: luminance signal (R + G), red : green signal = R output ÷ G output (or vice versa; red : green ratio), blue-yellow signal = luminance signal ÷ B output
If luminance/intensity changes, colour stays constant (increased activity signals increased luminance but not colour if cone activity ratio is the same)
If WVL is changed, colour changes but not luminance
This encodes colour by comparing activity across cone types; dual cone activity causes opposite changes in neural activity (R:G increased by +R and decreased by +G)
Adaptation to a colour swings channel sensitivity to opponent colour
Ewald Hering: 4 'psychological pure primary colours'; red + green (no Y/B), yellow + blue (no R/G) ⇒ supported by the fact there's four opponent signals in the colour aftereffect
How we know the red–green system was developed for finding fruit
1. Sumner & Mollon, 2000 + Lovell et al., 2005 found a monkey in tropical rainforests that likes a certain type of yellow fruit, measured WVL range of fruit + surrounding leaves, measured WVL sensitivity of red and green cones in monkey's retina, tuning of cone sensitivity curve was best for differentiating 'fruit' signal from 'leaf' signal; small changes in the cone response curves would make differentiation harder
2. Lovell et al., 2005 found red-green system worked across luminance levels (e.g. shady/sunny days, weather changes, etc.)
Deuteranopia→deuteranopes have no green/medium-wave cones
Tritanopia→tritanopes have no blue/short-wave cones (super rare)
Anomalous trichromats→trichromats with a genetic anomaly affecting a cone type's sensitivity have abnormal colour vision
Deuteranomaly→green cone's peak sensitivity is closer to red than normal (e.g. in a yellow colour-matching experiment, they would make the colour match with less red)
Protanomaly→red cone's peak sensitivity is closer to green than normal (e.g. in a yellow colour-matching experiment, they would make the colour match with more red than most people)
Genetically inherited + gender differences (more common in men)
Rod monochromacy→total lack of cones; incidence rate of 0.0003% in the population
Colour vision can be affected by diseases (e.g. diabetes) and other factors (e.g. doing drugs)
Dichromats are less susceptible to certain camouflages ⇒ they were recruited in WWII to see past camouflage
Asian/African monkeys are trichromats (with some colour-blind members); male American monkeys only have the primitive blue-yellow system, with half of females being trichromats
To know the 'true' colour of an object, you need to disregard lighting ⇒ brain looks at different objects all at once ⇒ e.g. if lighting is red, everything appears red ⇒ system disregards red
Things remain the same colour even across WVL changes because they are e.g. bluer/redder/greener than other objects
Edwin Land, 1983: lit a Mondrian pattern with red, green and blue light ⇒ a single patch changes colour over WVLs; doesn't if part of Mondrian pattern = = = demonstrates colour constancy, where an isolated patch of colour changes with wavelength but remains constant when part of a pattern (because there's nothing to compare against)
Single cells also respond to Mondrian experiment; WVL changes impacts V1 but not V4 (differentiates between surface colour and light wavelength)
Loss of colour vision after damage to extrastriate cortex, even with retaining their cones (luminance differences detectable)
V4 lesion study (Cowey and Heywood, 1995) reveals this area is not solely responsible for colour vision
V8 is a small area adjacent to V4; activity could be tested with colour gratings (adjusted for luminance so that activity corresponds only to colour; compare response to luminance grating)
V1-3, 8 excited by colour grating but not V4
V8 is active even without actual present colour info; evidenced by activity + V4 inactivity during colour aftereffect
Consensus is roughly divided between V4 and more popularly V8