Back to all available

Evaluating the scotopic visual sensitivity of walleye (Sander vitreus) and implications for foraging habitat

animal-behavior
aquaculture-fisheries-and-fish-science
freshwater-biology
environmental-impacts

Abstract

Understanding the physiological limits of visual detection is essential for delineating habitat use in freshwater fishes. Walleye (Sander vitreus), a crepuscular predator with well-documented low-light foraging capabilities, exhibits visual adaptations suited for dim environments. Using electroretinography (ERG), we determined the scotopic spectral sensitivity of adult S. vitreus and modeled their potential visual foraging depth under a range of optical conditions. Peak spectral sensitivity occurred between 500–550 nm, aligning with wavelengths that penetrate mesotrophic systems most effectively. We used ERG-derived irradiance thresholds in combination with the Beer-Lambert light attenuation model to estimate maximum depths for visual detection under solar and lunar illumination across a range of turbidity levels. Results indicate that under daylight conditions, S. vitreus can detect light to depths exceeding 77 m in clear water (kPAR = 0.3) and ~13 m in turbid systems (kPAR = 1.2). Under moonlight, detection is possible to 11.3 m and 1.9 m, respectively. These depth estimates exceed commonly reported habitat use, suggesting that vision may remain functional beyond expected depth ranges. Our findings support the visual pigment sensitivity hypothesis and provide a physiological basis for understanding the spatial and temporal foraging strategies of walleye across diverse freshwater environments.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].