On the mechanisms of the interocular light adaptation effect

Changes in sensitivity of the dark-adapted eye during concurrent light adaptation of the other eye

“…Auerbach and Peachey (1984) reported that monocular preadaptation to broadband red light within a luminance range of 2.5-5.5 log td lowers thresholds at 7 deg above the fovea in the Reprint requests to: C.R. They also confirmed the findings of Lansford and Baker (1969), Paris and Prestrude (1975), and Makous et al (1976) by showing that monocular dark adaptation raises the threshold in the other eye (previously adapted to red), tested at the same retinal locus. They also confirmed the findings of Lansford and Baker (1969), Paris and Prestrude (1975), and Makous et al (1976) by showing that monocular dark adaptation raises the threshold in the other eye (previously adapted to red), tested at the same retinal locus.…”

“…Dark adaptation is usually thought of as a peripheral matter since "the mechanisms underlying light and dark adaptation are largely retinal in origin" (Dowling, 1987). However, contrary to observations that the sensitivities of the two eyes during dark adaptation are largely independent (Crawford, 1940;Buck & Pulos, 1987), several studies (Kravkov & Semenovskaja, 1933;Lansford & Baker, 1969;Paris & Prestrude, 1975;Makous et al, 1976;Makous, 1990) have shown that the sensitivity of one eye during dark adaptation can be influenced by the state of adaptation of the other. For certain stimulus configurations, monocular dark adaptation may proceed more rapidly when both eyes are initially light adapted than when the nontest eye is initially dark adapted and the test eye light adapted.…”

“…It appears that these changes are observed when the signals from the two eyes are unequal, either because of an unequal state of adaptation, as in Lansford and Baker (1969), Paris and Prestrude (1975), and the present study; or when the signal from one eye is reduced by ischemia, which is the method used by Makous et al (1976). It appears that these changes are observed when the signals from the two eyes are unequal, either because of an unequal state of adaptation, as in Lansford and Baker (1969), Paris and Prestrude (1975), and the present study; or when the signal from one eye is reduced by ischemia, which is the method used by Makous et al (1976).…”

Visual defects in the uninjured eye of patients with unilateral eye injury

“…The first assumes that the damaged eye can affect the visual functions of the uninjured eye via interactions at the cortical level and efferent pathways from the brain to the retina. This hypothesis has been used to explain the differences found in the course of dark adaptation after monocular or binocular bleaching (Paris & Prestrude, 1975;Makous, Teller & Boothe, 1976). The explanation,, however, must be viewed with caution as the perceptual thresholds measured during dark adaptation can be explained by cortical interactions alone without efferent processing.…”

Current Views and some Suggestions about Mutual Influences of Eye Dipoles as Revealed by EOG

“…The authors con clude that the source of the phenomenon lies within the 'non-test eye', rather than at a central site at which the two eyes con verge. Baris and Prestrude [1975] investi gated the differential influences of rod and cone by the use of monochromatic-adapting fields. The main conclusion was that al though rods play the major role in the inter ocular light adaptation, the influence of cones cannot be ruled out.…”