“…Recent comparative work of ocellar systems has sparked a renewed interest in their functional design: (a) Although ocelli are generally not focused, in some cases, such as in the ocelli of dragonflies (Berry, Stange, Olberg, & Kleef, ; Berry, Stange, & Warrant, ; Berry, van Kleef, & Stange, ; Stange, Stowe, Chahl, & Massro, ; van Kleef et al, ) and in the equatorial region of the honeybee ocelli, ocellar retinae appear to be close to the focal plane of the lens (Hung & Ibbotson, ; Ribi, Warrant, & Zeil, ); (b) Ocellar retinae are very diverse, in particular with respect to the arrangement and shape of rhabdoms (e.g., Zeil et al, ); (c) The retinae of most ocellar systems are divided into a dorsal and a ventral part which differ in their distance from the ocellar lens surface, in the sizes and arrangements of rhabdoms and in the properties of screening pigments (e.g., Ribi et al, ; Zeil et al, ); (d) The organization of rhabdoms in many hymenopteran ocellar retinae suggests that ocellar photoreceptors are polarization sensitive (Geiser & Labhart, ; Ribi et al, ; Taylor et al, ; Zeil et al, ) as shown by electrophysiological recordings (Geiser and Labhart, ; Ogawa et al, ); (e) In insects that are active at low light, ocellar optics and rhabdoms are enlarged, compared to diurnal insects and thus show the usual adaptations to dim‐light vision (e.g., Berry, Wcislo, & Warrant, ; Greiner, ; Narendra et al, ; Somanathan, Kelber, Borges, Wallen, & Warrant, ; Streinzer, Brockmann, Nagaraja, & Spaethe, ; Warrant, Kelber, Wallen, & Wcislo, ); (f) In ants, ocellar systems also depend on the mode of locomotion, being larger in flying, compared to walking castes (Narendra, Ramirez‐Esquivel, & Ribi, ).…”