Mouse hue and wavelength-specific luminance contrast sensitivity are non-uniform across visual space

Abstract

9Mammalian visual behaviors, as well as responses in the neural systems thought to underlie these 10 behaviors, are driven by luminance and hue contrast. With tools for measuring activity in cell-type 11 specific populations in the mouse during visual behavior gaining traction, it is important to define the 12 extent of luminance and hue information that is behaviorally-accessible to the mouse. A non-uniform 13 distribution of cone opsins in the mouse potentially complicates both luminance and hue sensitivity: 14 opposing gradients of short (UV-shifted) and middle (blue/green) cone opsins suggest that hue 15 discrimination and wavelength-specific luminance contrast sensitivity may differ depending on 16 retinotopic location. Here we ask if, and how well, mice can discriminate color and wavelength-specific 17 luminance across visuotopic space. We found that mice were able to discriminate hue, and were able 18 to do so more broadly across visuotopic space than expected from the cone-opsin distribution. We also 19 found wavelength-band specific differences in luminance sensitivity. 20 21 peer-reviewed)

Integrating Optogenetic Stimulation of Olfactory Bulb Glomeruli with Foot Shock Fear Conditioning: A Robust Method for Investigating Olfactory-based Fear Conditioning

“…To verify that the observed responses from the light stimulation were the result of activation of the ChIEF-expressing neurons and not from the use of light as a visual cue, green light (540nm, output power, 20-22mW), which does not activate ChIEF, was used. Mice are much less sensitive to such long wavelength light (Denman et al, 2017, 2018; Peirson et al, 2018). During the green light stimulation, significant behavioral differences from the baseline behavior were not observed (Left zone - 459 ± 36.13 s, Right zone - 441 ± 36.13 s, P = 0.81, Light zone - 441 ± 23.88s, Safe zone - 459 ± 23.88 s, P = 0.72, Figure 2d-f), confirming that the mice did not use visual cues to perform the task.…”

“…Mice are much less sensitive to such long wavelength light (Denman et al, 2017(Denman et al, , 2018Peirson et al, 2018). During the green light stimulation, significant behavioral differences from the baseline behavior were not observed (Left zone -459 ± 36.13 s, Right zone -441 ± 36.13 s, P = 0.81, Light zone -441 ± 23.88s, Safe zone -459 ± 23.88 s, P = 0.72, Figure 2d-f), confirming that the mice did not use visual cues to perform the task.…”

The influence of stimulus duration on olfactory perception

“…Finally, to verify that the observed responses from light stimulation were the result of activation of ChIEF-expressing neurons and not from the use of light as a visual cue, we used green light (540nm, output power, 20-22mw), which does not activate ChIEF; mice are also relatively insensitive to such long wavelength light [ 55 – 57 ]. During the green light stimulation, we did not observe significant behavioral differences from the baseline behavior (Left zone—457.5 ± 51.09 s, Right zone—442.5 ± 51.09 s, P = 0.89, Light zone—463.8 ± 16.87 s, Safe zone—436.2 ± 16.87 s, P = 0.45, Fig 6A–6C , n = 6), confirming that the mice did not use visual cues to perform the task.…”

Functional Relevance of Dual Olfactory Bulbs in Olfactory Coding

“…To verify that the observed responses from the light stimulation were the result of activation of the ChIEF-expressing neurons and not from the use of light as a visual cue, we used green light (540 nm, output power, 20–22 mw), which does not activate ChIEF. Mice are much less sensitive to such long wavelength light ( Denman et al, 2017 , 2018 ; Peirson et al, 2018 ). During the green light stimulation, we did not observe significant behavioral difference from the baseline behavior (left zone, 459 ± 36.13 s and right zone, 441 ± 36.13 s, p = 0.81; light zone, 441 ± 23.88 s and safe zone, 459 ± 23.88 s, p = 0.72; Fig.…”