Nocturnal insects have evolved remarkable visual capacities, despite small eyes and tiny brains. They can see colour, control flight and land, react to faint movements in their environment, navigate using dim celestial cues and find their way home after a long and tortuous foraging trip using learned visual landmarks. These impressive visual abilities occur at light levels when only a trickle of photons are being absorbed by each photoreceptor, begging the question of how the visual system nonetheless generates the reliable signals needed to steer behaviour. In this review, I attempt to provide an answer to this question. Part of the answer lies in their compound eyes, which maximize light capture. Part lies in the slow responses and high gains of their photoreceptors, which improve the reliability of visual signals. And a very large part lies in the spatial and temporal summation of these signals in the optic lobe, a strategy that substantially enhances contrast sensitivity in dim light and allows nocturnal insects to see a brighter world, albeit a slower and coarser one. What is abundantly clear, however, is that during their evolution insects have overcome several serious potential visual limitations, endowing them with truly extraordinary night vision. This article is part of the themed issue ‘Vision in dim light’.

The nocturnal Bogong moth (Agrotis infusa) is an iconic and well-known Australian insect that is also a remarkable nocturnal navigator. Like the Monarch butterflies of North America, Bogong moths make a yearly migration over enormous distances, from southern Queensland, western and northwestern New South Wales (NSW) and western Victoria, to the alpine regions of NSW and Victoria. After emerging from their pupae in early spring, adult Bogong moths embark on a long nocturnal journey towards the Australian Alps, a journey that can take many days or even weeks and cover over 1000 km. Once in the Alps (from the end of September), Bogong moths seek out the shelter of selected and isolated high ridge-top caves and rock crevices (typically at elevations above 1800 m). In hundreds of thousands, moths line the interior walls of these cool alpine caves where they “hibernate” over the summer months (referred to as “aestivation”). Towards the end of the summer (February and March), the same individuals that arrived months earlier leave the caves and begin their long return trip to their breeding grounds. Once there, moths mate, lay eggs and die. The moths that hatch in the following spring then repeat the migratory cycle afresh. Despite having had no previous experience of the migratory route, these moths find their way to the Alps and locate their aestivation caves that are dotted along the high alpine ridges of southeastern Australia. How naïve moths manage this remarkable migratory feat still remains a mystery, although there are many potential sensory cues along the migratory route that moths might rely on during their journey, including visual, olfactory, mechanical and magnetic cues. Here we review our current knowledge of the Bogong moth, including its natural history, its ecology, its cultural importance to the Australian Aborigines and what we understand about the sensory basis of its long-distance nocturnal migration. From this analysis it becomes clear that Bogong moth represents a new and very promising model organism for understanding the sensory basis of nocturnal migration in insects.

Substantial evidence now supports the hypothesis that the common ancestor of bats was nocturnal and capable of both powered flight and laryngeal echolocation. This scenario entails a parallel sensory and biomechanical transition from a nonvolant, vision-reliant mammal to one capable of sonar and flight. Here we consider anatomical constraints and opportunities that led to a sonar rather than vision-based solution. We show that bats’ common ancestor had eyes too small to allow for successful aerial hawking of flying insects at night, but an auditory brain design sufficient to afford echolocation. Further, we find that among extant predatory bats (all of which use laryngeal echolocation), those with putatively less sophisticated biosonar have relatively larger eyes than do more sophisticated echolocators. We contend that signs of ancient trade-offs between vision and echolocation persist today, and that non-echolocating, phytophagous pteropodid bats may retain some of the necessary foundations for biosonar.