[twic]

Also, even if there was some advantage to doing so, i'm not sure how animals could see a wavelength that short. They would need a photoreceptor protein which can absorb photons of that wavelength and turn them into some sort of chemical change which can trigger a signalling cascade. That protein would have to have a pair of molecular orbitals which are h * 148 nm apart. What can give you that?

The ethene double bond absorbs at ~165 nm, a benzene ring at ~180 nm, and building things out of those tends to increase the wavelength, not decrease it. 148 nm is single bond territory - could you have a chromophore which uses photons of the right wavelength to break a bond, and then somehow react to the presence of free radicals?!

[narag]

A long time ago I saw some UV photos of flowers, compared to visible and IR. There were some distinct features. That suggests some insects could see them, but of course it's just speculation.

[blincoln]

It's not speculation. Bee eyes have receptors for green, blue, and UV-A light, for example. But as BenjiWiebe mentioned, that's not the same as being sensitive to UV-C.

I'm sure there would be some value in seeing others parts of UV. Some minerals fluoresce from one type of UV light but not another, so they'd be dark in the bands that cause them to fluoresce. Mantis shrimp can apparently see into UV-B, but I'm not aware of anything living that can see UV-C.

[BenjiWiebe]

That would be UV-A, I believe. Not UV-C.