Diminished pupillary light reflex at high irradiances in melanopsin-knockout mice

Science

Volumn 299, Issue 5604, 2003, Pages 245-247

  Lucas, R J ^a   Hattar, S ^b   Takao, M ^c   Berson, D M ^c   Foster, R G ^a   Yau, K W ^b  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BRAIN; CELLS; GENES; PHOTOSENSITIVITY; PROTEINS;

RETINAL GANGLION CELLS (RGC);

VISION;

MELANOPSIN; OPSIN; PROTEIN; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

LIGHT; VISUAL ANALYSIS;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; BRAIN NUCLEUS; CIRCADIAN RHYTHM; CONTROLLED STUDY; IRRADIATION; KNOCKOUT MOUSE; MORPHOLOGY; MOUSE STRAIN; NONHUMAN; PHOTOSENSITIVITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUPIL REFLEX; RETINA CONE; RETINA GANGLION CELL; RETINA ROD; VISION;

ADAPTATION, OCULAR; ANIMALS; CARBACHOL; CIRCADIAN RHYTHM; DARKNESS; LIGHT; MICE; MICE, INBRED C57BL; MICE, KNOCKOUT; OLIVARY NUCLEUS; OPSIN; PHENOTYPE; PHOTORECEPTORS, VERTEBRATE; PHOTOTRANSDUCTION; PUPIL; REFLEX, PUPILLARY; RETINAL DEGENERATION; RETINAL GANGLION CELLS; SUPRACHIASMATIC NUCLEUS;

ANIMALIA; MAMMALIA;

EID: 0347926182     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1077293     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. R. J. Lucas, M. S. Freedman, M. Munoz, J. M. Garcia-Fernandez, R. G. Foster, Science 284, 505 (1999).
2. R. J. Lucas, R. H. Douglas, R. G. Foster, Nature Neurosci. 4, 621 (2001).
3. D. M. Berson, F. A. Dunn, M. Takao, Science 295, 1070 (2002).
4. S. Hattar, H.-W. Liao, M. Takao, D. M. Berson, K.-W. Yau, Science 295, 1065 (2002).
5. J. J. Gooley, J. Lu, T. C. Chou, T. E. Scammell, C. B. Saper, Nature Neurosci. 4, 1165 (2001).
6. J. Hannibal, P. Hindersson, S. M. Knudsen, B. Georg, J. Fahrenkrug, J. Neurosci. 22 (RC191), 1 (2002).
7. I. Provencio, M. D. Rollag, A. M. Castrucci, Nature 415, 493 (2002).
8. I. Provencio et al., J. Neurosci. 20, 600 (2000).
9. Materials and methods are available as supporting material on Science Online.
10. L J. Trejo, C. M. Cicerone, Brain Res. 300, 49 (1984).
11. R. J. Clarke, H. Ikeda, Exp. Brain Res. 57, 224 (1985).
12. K. Nakatani, K.-W. Yau, Nature 334, 69 (1988).
13. J. L. Schnapf, B. J. Nunn, M. Meister, D. A. Baylor, J. Physiol. 427, 681 (1990).
14. Irradiance-response relations were based on light intensities at the comea because the dynamic nature of pupil size in these experiments precluded accurate assessment of the effective retinal irradiance. Pupil response was quantified as the minimum pupil area achieved during 1 min of light exposure, expressed as a fraction of the initial pupil area measured over a 2-s period before light exposure. In control experiments (dark bar at left in Fig. 3), the same measurements were made over a period of 1 min without activation of light stimulus, Even without a light stimulus, the pupil constricted slightly, presumably because of its high sensitivity and a very low level of stray light around the pupillometer and/or a tiny percentage of visible light from the infrared light-emitting diodes used for viewing the eye (9).
15. -/- mice and rd/rd cl (same level as wildtype) mice. In our experiments, α = 0.86. It is derived from the simple model that a component (α) of the pupil reflex can be driven by the rod/ cone system and/or the melanopsin system, but the remainder (1 - α) can only be driven by the melanopsin system. Data were interpolated where the two mouse lines did not receive identical irradiances.
16. max.
17. We thank R. H. Douglas and T. Shelley for help in constructing the apparatus for measuring the pupillary light reflex, the Johns Hopkins Transgenic Facility for help and advice, Y. Liang for help in genotyping, and M. W. Hankins and members of the Yau laboratory for help, critique, and scientific discussions. Supported by grants from the UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council and Hammersmith Hospital Special Trustees (R.J.L. and R.G.F.) and the U.S. National Eye Institute (K.-W.Y. and D.M.B.).