Melanopsin and calbindin immunoreactivity in the inner retina of humans and marmosets

Chandra, Ashleigh J.; Lee, Sammy; Grünert, Ulrike

doi:10.1017/s0952523819000087

Cited by 24 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We also compared the densities of the two most intense ChAT + cell populations in the INL (putative OFF starburst cells) and GCL (putative ON starburst cells) and found that the density of ON starburst cells was on average slightly lower than that of OFF starburst cells (marmoset: 655 vs. 685 cells/mm 2 , buzzard: 2500 vs. 3250 cells/mm 2 , from areas of 2–10 mm in marmoset and 8–24 mm in buzzard). This is in line with the density of ON and OFF ChAT cells in mouse retina (945 vs. 1100 cells/mm 2 , Jeon et al, 1998) but differs from that in human and macaque retina where ON ChAT cells are more frequent than OFF ChAT cells (ratio of 70:30; Chandra et al, 2019; Rodieck & Marshak, 1992). The reported ON to OFF ratio of 30:70 in marmoset (Chandra et al, 2019; Moritoh et al, 2013; Weltzien et al, 2015) can be explained with the additional ChAT + /Sox2 − cells in the INL.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

“…This is in line with the density of ON and OFF ChAT cells in mouse retina (945 vs. 1100 cells/mm 2 , Jeon et al, 1998) but differs from that in human and macaque retina where ON ChAT cells are more frequent than OFF ChAT cells (ratio of 70:30; Chandra et al, 2019; Rodieck & Marshak, 1992). The reported ON to OFF ratio of 30:70 in marmoset (Chandra et al, 2019; Moritoh et al, 2013; Weltzien et al, 2015) can be explained with the additional ChAT + /Sox2 − cells in the INL.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Expression of cell markers and transcription factors in the avian retina compared with that in the marmoset retina

Haverkamp

Albert

Balaji

et al. 2021

J of Comparative Neurology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the vertebrate retina, amacrine and ganglion cells represent the most diverse cell classes. They can be classified into different cell types by several features, such as morphology, light responses, and gene expression profile. Although birds possess high visual acuity (similar to primates that we used here for comparison) and tetrachromatic color vision, data on the expression of transcription factors in retinal ganglion cells of birds are largely missing. In this study, we tested various transcription factors, known to label subpopulations of cells in mammalian retinae, in two avian species: the common buzzard (Buteo buteo), a raptor with exceptional acuity, and the domestic pigeon (Columba livia domestica), a good navigator and widely used model for visual cognition. Staining for the transcription factors Foxp2, Satb1 and Satb2 labeled most ganglion cells in the avian ganglion cell layer. CtBP2 was established as marker for displaced amacrine cells, which allowed us to reliably distinguish ganglion cells from displaced amacrine cells and assess their densities in buzzard and pigeon. When we additionally compared the temporal and central fovea of the buzzard with the fovea of primates, we found that the cellular organization in the pits was different in primates and raptors. In summary, we demonstrate that the expression of transcription factors is a defining feature of cell types not only in the retina of mammals but also in the retina of birds. The markers, which we have established, may provide useful tools for more detailed studies on the retinal circuitry of these highly visual animals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

Expression of cell markers and transcription factors in the avian retina compared with that in the marmoset retina

Haverkamp

Albert

Balaji

et al. 2021

J of Comparative Neurology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The gigantic displaced M1 ganglion cells of human retina are a distinct type based on their morphology 5,22 , and the data reported here on the preponderance of excitatory synaptic inputs from OFF bipolar cells to their homologs in macaque retina support this nding. This is the rst study to identify the types of bipolar cells that provide input to displaced ipRGCs using electron microscopy (EM).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Synaptic Inputs to Displaced Intrinsically-Photosensitive Ganglion Cells in Macaque Retina

Bordt¹,

Patterson

Kuchenbecker

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ganglion cells are the projection neurons of the retina. Intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) express the photopigment melanopsin and also receive input from rods and cones via bipolar cells and amacrine cells. In primates, multiple types of ipRGCs have been identified. The ipRGCs with somas in the ganglion cell layer have been studied extensively, but less is known about those with somas in the inner nuclear layer, the “displaced” cells. To investigate their synaptic inputs, three sets of horizontal, ultrathin sections through central macaque retina were collected using serial blockface scanning electron microscopy. One displaced ganglion cell with a smaller soma and lipofuscin granules was classified as a displaced M1 cell. It received nearly all of its excitatory inputs from ON bipolar cells and would have ON responses to light. In all three volumes, there were cells in the inner nuclear layer that had extremely large somas, varicose axons and dendrites with a large diameter that formed a sparse arbor in the outermost stratum of the inner plexiform layer. They were identified as the gigantic displaced M1 type of ipRGCs based on this morphology and on the high density of granules in their somas. They received extensive input from amacrine cells. The vast majority of their excitatory inputs were from OFF bipolar cells, and they would have OFF responses to light stimuli under some conditions, like the novel type of ipRGCs described recently in humans. They may account for the paradoxical pupillary responses seen in some patients with congenital stationary night blindness.

show abstract

“…Labeling for the photoreceptor terminal marker SV2 at D120 (red) demonstrated that structures consistent in shape with photoreceptor terminals (white arrows) were detected in both dissection ( Figure 4 E) and suspension-grown ( Figure 4 F) cultures. We co-labeled with the calcium binding protein calbindin (green, Figure 4 E,F) which is expressed in the human retina in cones, subsets of inner retinal neurons, and some ganglion cells [ 34 , 35 ], and observed calbindin positive cells (yellow arrows, Figure 4 E,F) under both culture conditions. However, cells exhibiting horizontal cell morphology, characterized by large squat cell bodies and processes that penetrated horizontally through the tissue (i.e., perpendicular to the length of the photoreceptor) were detected only in dissection grown cultures.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adherent but Not Suspension-Cultured Embryoid Bodies Develop into Laminated Retinal Organoids

Radojevic

Conley

Bennett

2021

JDB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) are differentiated into three-dimensional (3D) retinal organoids to study retinogenesis and diseases that would otherwise be impossible. The complexity and low yield in current protocols remain a technical challenge, particularly for inexperienced personnel. Differentiation protocols require labor-intensive and time-consuming dissection of optic vesicles (OVs). Here we compare this method with a suspension method of developing retinal organoids. iPSCs were differentiated with standard protocols but the suspension-grown method omitted the re-plating of embryoid bodies and dissection of OVs. All other media and treatments were identical between developmental methods. Developmental maturation was evaluated with RT-qPCR and immunocytochemistry. Dissection- and suspension-derived retinal organoids displayed temporal biogenesis of retinal cell types. Differences in retinal organoids generated by the two methods of differentiation included temporal developmental and the organization of neural retina layers. Retinal organoids grown in suspension showed delayed development and disorganized retinal layers compared to the dissected retinal organoids. We found that omitting the re-plating of EBs to form OVs resulted in numerous OVs that were easy to identify and matured along a retinal lineage. While more efficient, the suspension method led to retinal organoids with disorganized retinal layers compared to those obtained using conventional dissection protocols.

show abstract

Melanopsin and calbindin immunoreactivity in the inner retina of humans and marmosets

Cited by 24 publications

References 68 publications

Expression of cell markers and transcription factors in the avian retina compared with that in the marmoset retina

Expression of cell markers and transcription factors in the avian retina compared with that in the marmoset retina

Synaptic Inputs to Displaced Intrinsically-Photosensitive Ganglion Cells in Macaque Retina

Adherent but Not Suspension-Cultured Embryoid Bodies Develop into Laminated Retinal Organoids

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About