Key pointsr Intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) are a rare population of retinal output neurons that drives subconscious physiological responses to light, e.g. pupillary constriction, synchronization of daily rhythms to the light-dark cycle and regulation of hormone secretion.r This study investigated the functional diversity among the five known types of ipRGCs, named M1-M5.r We found that M2-M5 cells could detect spatial differences in light intensity, implicating an ability to analyse the form of visual stimuli.r All five ipRGC types responded robustly to moving lights, and M1-M4 cells appeared to respond optimally to different speeds, suggesting they might analyse the speed of motion.r M1-M4 cells were shown to project to the superior colliculus, a brain area known to detect novel objects in the visual scene, suggesting that the form and motion information signalled by these four types of ipRGCs could contribute to this visual function.Abstract Intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) mediate non-imageforming visual responses, including pupillary constriction, circadian photoentrainment and suppression of pineal melatonin secretion. Five morphological types of ipRGCs, M1-M5, have been identified in mice. In order to understand their functions better, we studied the photoresponses of all five cell types, by whole-cell recording from fluorescently labelled ipRGCs visualized using multiphoton microscopy. All ipRGC types generated melanopsin-based ('intrinsic') as well as synaptically driven ('extrinsic') light responses. The intrinsic photoresponses of M1 cells were lower threshold, higher amplitude and faster than those of M2-M5. The peak amplitudes of extrinsic light responses differed among the ipRGC types; however, the responses of all cell types had comparable thresholds, kinetics and waveforms, and all cells received rod input. While all five types exhibited inhibitory amacrine-cell and excitatory bipolar-cell inputs from the 'on' channel, M1 and M3 received additional 'off'-channel inhibition, possibly through their 'off'-sublamina dendrites. The M2-M5 ipRGCs had centre-surround-organized receptive fields, implicating a capacity to detect spatial contrast. In contrast, the receptive fields of M1 cells lacked surround antagonism, which might be caused by the surround of the inhibitory input nullifying the surround of the excitatory input. All ipRGCs responded robustly to a wide range of motion speeds, and M1-M4 cells appeared tuned to different speeds, suggesting that they might analyse the speed of motion. Retrograde labelling revealed that M1-M4 cells project to the superior colliculus, suggesting that the contrast and motion information signalled by these cells could be used by this sensorimotor area to detect novel objects and motion in the visual field. (Received 27 July 2013; accepted after revision 5 January 2014; first published online 6 January 2014)

Binocular coordination of eye movements is essential for stereopsis (depth perception) and to prevent double vision. More than a century ago, Hering and Helmholtz debated the neural basis of binocular coordination. Helmholtz believed that each eye is controlled independently and that binocular coordination is learned. Hering believed that both eyes are innervated by common command signals that yoke the eye movements (Hering's law of equal innervation). Here we provide evidence that Hering's law is unlikely to be correct. We show that premotor neurons in the paramedian pontine reticular formation that were thought to encode conjugate velocity commands for saccades (rapid eye movements) actually encode monocular commands for either right or left eye saccades. However, 66% of the abducens motor neurons, which innervate the ipsilateral lateral rectus muscle, fire as a result of movements of either eye. The distribution of sensitivity to ipsilateral and contralateral eye movements across the abducens motor neuron pool may provide a basis for learning binocular coordination in infancy and adapting it throughout life.

Neurotrophin-3 augments nerve regeneration in animal models for CMT1A and may benefit patients clinically, but these results need further confirmation.

1. The vestibuloocular reflex (VOR) stabilizes images on the retina against movements of the head in space. Viewing distance, target eccentricity, and location of the axis of rotation may influence VOR responses because rotation of the head about most axes in space rotates and translates the eyes relative to visual targets. To study the VOR response to combined rotation and translation, monkeys were placed on a rate table and rotated briefly in the dark about a vertical axis that was located in front of or behind the eyes. The monkeys fixated a near or far visual target that was extinguished before the rotation. Eye movements were recorded from both eyes by the use of the search coil technique. 2. Peak eye velocity evoked by the VOR was linearly related to vergence angle for any axis of rotation. The percent change in the VOR with near target viewing relative to far target viewing at a vergence angle of 20 degrees was linearly related to the location of the axis of rotation. Axes located behind the eyes produced positive changes in VOR amplitude, and axes located in front of the eyes produced negative changes in VOR amplitude. An axis of rotation located in the coronal plane containing the centers of rotation of the eyes produced no modification of VOR amplitude. For any axis, the VOR compensated for approximately 90% of the translation of the eye relative to near targets. 3. The initial VOR response was not correct in magnitude but was refined by a series of three temporally delayed corrections of increasing complexity. The earliest VOR-evoked eye movement (10-20 ms after rotation onset) was independent of viewing distance and rotational axis location. In the next 100 ms, eye speed appeared to be sequentially modified three times: within 20 ms by viewing distance; within 30 ms by otolith translation; and within 100 ms by eye translation relative to the visual target. 4. These data suggest a formal model of the VOR consisting of four channels. Channel 1 conveys an unmodified head rotation signal with a pure delay of 10 ms. Channel 2 conveys an angular head velocity signal, modified by viewing distance with a pure delay of 20 ms, but invariant with respect to the location of the axis of rotation. Channel 3 conveys a linear head velocity signal, dependent on the location of the axis of rotation, that is modified by viewing distance with a pure delay of 30 ms.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

No abstract