The growing eye: An autofocus system that works on very poor images

Vision Research

Volumn 39, Issue 9, 1999, Pages 1585-1589

  Schaeffel, Frank ^a   Diether, Sigrid ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Chickens; Hyperopia; Image processing; Myopia; Sign of defocus detection

Indexed keywords

ACCOMMODATION PARALYSIS; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CHICKEN; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; EYE AXIS LENGTH; EYE DEVELOPMENT; EYE REFRACTION; IMAGE PROCESSING; MYOPIA; NEWBORN; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETINA IMAGE; SPATIAL FREQUENCY DISCRIMINATION; SPECTACLES;

ACCOMMODATION, OCULAR; ANIMALS; ANIMALS, NEWBORN; BIOMETRY; CHICKENS; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; EYE; LENSES; MYOPIA; REFRACTION, OCULAR; SENSORY DEPRIVATION;

EID: 0033017701     PISSN: 00426989     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0042-6989(98)00304-6     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Bartmann M.L., Schaeffel F. A simple mechanism for emmetropization without cues from accommodation or colour. Vision Research. 34:1994;873-876.
2. Devadas M., Morgan I. Are there rhythms in scleral precursor synthesis? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Ophthalmology. 24:1996;45-47.
3. Diether S., Schaeffel F. Local changes in eye growth induced by imposed local refractive error despite active accommodation. Vision Research. 37:1997;659-668.
4. Fitzke F.W., Hayes B.P., Hodos W., Holden A.L. Electrophysiological optometry using Scheiner's principle in the pigeon eye. Journal of Physiology. 369:1985;17-31.
5. Glickstein M., Millodot M. Retinoscopy and eye size. Science. 192:1970;533-547.
6. Gwiazda J., Thorn F., Bauer J., Held R. Myopic children show insufficient accommodative response to blur. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 34:1993;690-694.
7. Kruger P.B., Pola J. Stimuli for accommodation: blur, chromatic aberration and size. Vision Research. 26:1986;957-971.
8. Kruger P.B., Mathews S., Katz M., Aggarwala K.R., Nowbotsing S. Accommodation without feedback suggests directional signals specify ocular focus. Vision Research. 37:1997;2511-2526.
9. McLean R.C., Wallman J. Despite severe imposed astigmatic blur, chicks compensate for spectacle lenses. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science (ARVO supplement). 38:1997;2521.
10. Naumann, K., & Schroeder, S. (1992). Bauelemente der Optik. In: Handbuch der technischen Optik (6th ed.) (pp. 345-350) Verlag München: Carl Hanser (in German).
11. Nickla D.L., Wildsoet C.F., Wallman J. Visual influences on diurnal rhythms in ocular length and choroidal thickness in chick eyes. Experimental Eye Research. 66:1998;163-181.
12. Ott M., Schaeffel F. A negatively powered lens in the chameleon. Nature. 373:1995;692-694.
13. Papastergiou G.I., Schmid G.F., Riva C.E., Mendel M.J., Stone R.A., Laties A.M. Ocular axial length and choroidal thickness in newly hatched chicks and 1-year old chickens fluctuate in a diurnal pattern that is influenced by visual experience and intraocular pressure changes. Experimental Eye Research. 66:1998;195-205.
14. Rohrer B., Schaeffel F., Zrenner E. Longitudinal chromatic aberration and emmetropization: results from the chicken eye. Journal of Physiology. 449:1992;363-376.
15. Schaeffel F., Troilo D., Wallman J., Howland H.C. Developing eyes that lack accommodation grow to compensate for imposed defocus. Visual Neuroscience. 4:1990;177-183.
16. Schaeffel F., Howland H.C. Properties of feedback loops controlling eye growth and refractive state in chicken. Vision Research. 31:1991;717-734.
17. Schmid K.L., Wildsoet C.F. Effects on the compensatory responses to positive and negative lenses of intermittant lens wear and ciliary nerve section in chicks. Vision Research. 36:1996;1023-1036.
18. Schmid K., Wildsoet C.F. Assessment of visual acuity and contrast sensitivity in the chick using an optokinetic nystagmus paradigm. Vision Research. 38:1998;2629-2634.
19. Schwahn H.N., Schaeffel F. Chick eyes under cycloplegia compensate for spectacle lenses despite six-hydroxy dopamine treatement. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 35:1994;3516-3525.
20. Sivak J. G., Curry T. A., Callender M. G., & Irving E. L. (1995). Is magnification a cue in defocus induced ametropia in chicks? In: Vision Science and its Applications (vol. 1) (pp. 84-87), OSA Technical Digest Series. Optical Society of America, Washington DC.
21. Smith E.L. Spectacle lenses and emmetropization: the role of optical defocus in regulating ocular development. Optometry and Vision Science. 75:1998;388-398.
22. Troilo D., Gottlieb M.D., Wallman J. Visual deprivation causes myopia in chicks with optic nerve section. Current Eye Research. 6:1987;993-999.
23. Wallman J., Turkel J., Trachtman J. Extreme myopia produced by modest changes in early visual experience. Science. 201:1978;1249-1251.
24. Weiss S., Schaeffel F. Diurnal growth rhythms in the chicken eye: relation to myopia development and retinal dopamine levels. Journal of Comparative Physiology A. 172:1993;263-270.
25. Wildsoet C., Wallman J. Choroidal and scleral mechanisms of compensation for spectacle lenses in chicks. Vision Research. 35:1995;1175-1195.