Effect of ambient illumination on the spatial properties of the center and surround of Y-cell receptive fields

Troy, John B.; Oh, Jin Kyun; Enroth‐Cugell, Christina

doi:10.1017/s0952523800005447

Cited by 31 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All ablated retinas were Ͼ50% NPY cell-ablated. Note that the large surround sizes observed here are consistent with those reported previously in cat and guinea pig: for cat, mean surround sizes Ϯ SD were 1633 Ϯ 851 m (for ON cells) and 1863 Ϯ 667 m (for OFF cells) (Troy et al, 1993); for guinea pig, surround sizes were at least as large as 2500 m because responses were elicited with annuli of that inner diameter (Demb et al, 1999). For our data in mouse, mean surround sizes Ϯ SD were 1216 Ϯ 830 m (ON cells) and 967 Ϯ 666 m (OFF cells).…”

Section: Ablation Of Npy Cells Alters Spatial Tuning Of Ganglion Cellssupporting

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Selective Ablation of a Class of Amacrine Cells Alters Spatial Processing in the Retina

Sinclair¹,

Jacobs²,

Nirenberg³

2004

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Ablation Of Npy Cells Alters Spatial Tuning Of Ganglion Cellssupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Thus, we found no indication that cells with large surrounds, the cells affected by the ablation, constitute just one cell class. Similarly, the large surround cells described in cat by Troy et al (1993) and in guinea pig by Demb et al (1999) also include both ON and OFF cells (for data, see Fig. 4 legend).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Selective Ablation of a Class of Amacrine Cells Alters Spatial Processing in the Retina

Sinclair¹,

Jacobs²,

Nirenberg³

2004

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…External currents were processed through a temporal low-pass filter with a time constant of 10 ms, but were not spatially filtered. Fixed-light spots were modeled as constant input currents with step onsets and sustained durations of 600 ms. whose relative center-surround strengths were fixed at their published values [25]. The averaged PSTH generated by the model [ Fig.…”

Section: Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

Stimulus-Specific Oscillations in a Retinal Model

Kenyon

Travis

Theiler

et al. 2004

IEEE Trans. Neural Netw.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-High-frequency oscillatory potentials (HFOPs) in the vertebrate retina are stimulus specific. The phases of HFOPs recorded at any given retinal location drift randomly over time, but regions activated by the same stimulus tend to remain phase locked with approximately zero lag, whereas regions activated by spatially separate stimuli are typically uncorrelated. Based on retinal anatomy, we previously postulated that HFOPs are mediated by feedback from a class of axon-bearing amacrine cells that receive excitation from neighboring ganglion cells-via gap junctions-and make inhibitory synapses back onto the surrounding ganglion cells. Using a computer model, we show here that such circuitry can account for the stimulus specificity of HFOPs in response to both high-and low-contrast features. Phase locking between pairs of model ganglion cells did not depend critically on their separation distance, but on whether the applied stimulus created a continuous path between them. The degree of phase locking between spatially separate stimuli was reduced by lateral inhibition, which created a buffer zone around strongly activated regions. Stimulating the inhibited region between spatially separate stimuli increased their degree of phase locking proportionately. Our results suggest several experimental strategies for testing the hypothesis that stimulus-specific HFOPs arise from axon-mediated feedback in the inner retina.

show abstract

“…Center and surround were weighted equally so that a spatially uniform image evoked no response. Divisive normalization captured ganglion-cell adaptation to local mean intensity (23). Thus, the filter measured contrast as a percent difference in intensity between center and surround relative to a divisive adaptation pool.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Retina is structured to process an excess of darkness in natural scenes

Ratliff

Borghuis

Kao

et al. 2010

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

190

215

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retinal ganglion cells that respond selectively to a dark spot on a brighter background (OFF cells) have smaller dendritic fields than their ON counterparts and are more numerous. OFF cells also branch more densely, and thus collect more synapses per visual angle. That the retina devotes more resources to processing dark contrasts predicts that natural images contain more dark information. We confirm this across a range of spatial scales and trace the origin of this phenomenon to the statistical structure of natural scenes. We show that the optimal mosaics for encoding natural images are also asymmetric, with OFF elements smaller and more numerous, matching retinal structure. Finally, the concentration of synapses within a dendritic field matches the information content, suggesting a simple principle to connect a concrete fact of neuroanatomy with the abstract concept of information: equal synapses for equal bits.ganglion cells | neural coding | vision T he brain separates light from dark unequally. Psychophysical studies and measurements of visually evoked potentials show greater sensitivity to light decrements and dark spots in images (1, 2). Also, more cortical cells respond to negative than positive contrasts (3). In fact, this asymmetry begins with the second order (bipolar) neurons in the retina, which rectify the local contrast signal from the cone array (Fig. 1A). OFF cone bipolar cells (responding mostly to negative contrasts) outnumber the ON cells (responding mostly to positive contrasts) by 2-fold (4); thus, right from the start, the brain provides more resources for signaling negative contrasts.This aspect of retinal structure continues through the ganglion-cell level, where some ganglion-cell types have paired ON and OFF polarities (e.g., P and M in monkey, brisk-transient and brisk-sustained in rabbit and guinea pig, and X and Y in cat). Of these, the OFF cells have narrower dendritic fields and correspondingly narrower receptive-field centers than their ON partners [guinea pig (Fig. 1B), rat (5), rabbit (6), monkey (7), human (8), and smaller differences in cat (9)]. Thus, to cover the retina, OFF cells outnumber their ON partners. OFF arbors are narrower across cell classes with different spatiotemporal bandwidths (e.g., they are narrower for both midget and parasol cells in humans) (8). Specifically, whereas in fovea, midget cells are paired (one ON and one OFF per cone), beyond fovea, where midget cells collect from many bipolar cells and cones, OFF cells have smaller arbors and hence, are more numerous.While OFF cells distribute more densely than their counterpart ON cells, both types have similar receptive-field overlap (spacing is about two times the SD of a Gaussian fit to the central receptive field) (6, 10, 11). Furthermore, OFF arbors (as we quantify here) branch more densely (5) and provide similar dendritic membrane areas as ON arbors. Because the membrane density of excitatory synapses (synapses/μm 2 ) is constant across an arbor and across cell types (12, 13), OFF cells receive simi...

show abstract

Effect of ambient illumination on the spatial properties of the center and surround of Y-cell receptive fields

Cited by 31 publications

References 52 publications

Selective Ablation of a Class of Amacrine Cells Alters Spatial Processing in the Retina

Selective Ablation of a Class of Amacrine Cells Alters Spatial Processing in the Retina

Stimulus-Specific Oscillations in a Retinal Model

Retina is structured to process an excess of darkness in natural scenes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About