Responses of primate retinal ganglion cells to perimetric stimuli

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 52, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 764-771

  Swanson, William H ^a   Sun, Hao ^b   Lee, Barry B ^c,d   Cao, Dingcai ^e  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH EASTERN NORWAY   (Norway)

^c STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^d MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR BIOPHYSICAL CHEMISTRY   (Germany)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL CELL; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; LUMINESCENCE; MACACA; MAGNOCELLULAR GANGLION CELL; MICHAELIS MENTEN KINETICS; NERVE CELL; NERVE CELL STIMULATION; NONHUMAN; PARVOCELLULAR GANGLION CELL; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETINA GANGLION CELL; STIMULUS RESPONSE; ANIMAL; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; MACACA FASCICULARIS; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; RADIATION EXPOSURE; VISUAL FIELD;

ANIMALS; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; MACACA FASCICULARIS; PHOTIC STIMULATION; RETINAL GANGLION CELLS; VISUAL FIELD TESTS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 79953277393     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: 15525783     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.10-6158     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Goldmann H. Fundamentals of exact perimetry. Optom Vis Sci. 1999;76:599-604.
2. Anderson DR, Patella VM. Automated Static Perimetry. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book; 1999.
3. Quigley HA, Dunkelberger GR, Green WR. Retinal ganglion cell atrophy correlated with automated perimetry in human eyes with glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1989;107:453-464.
4. Glovinsky Y, Quigley HA, Pease ME. Foveal ganglion cell loss is size dependent in experimental glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34:395-400.
5. Vickers JC, Schumer RA, Podos SMW, RF Riederer BM, Morrison JH. Differential vulnerability of neurochemically identified sub-populations of retinal neurons in a monkey model of glaucoma. Brain Res. 1995;680:23-35.
6. Johnson CA. Early losses of visual function in glaucoma. Optom Vis Sci. 1995;72:359-370.
7. Johnson CA, Samuels SJ. Screening for glaucomatous visual field loss with frequency-doubling perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997;38:413-425.
8. Maddess T, Severt WL. Testing for glaucoma with the frequency-doubling illusion in the whole, macular and eccentric visual fields. Aust N Z J Ophthalmol. 1999;27:194-196.
9. Maddess T, Hemmi JM, James AC. Evidence for spatial aliasing effects in the Y-like cells of the mango cellular visual pathway. Vision Res. 1998;38:1843-1859.
10. White AJ, Sun H, Swanson WH, Lee BB. An examination of physiological mechanisms underlying the frequency- doubling illusion. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:3590-3599.
11. Morgan JE, Uchida H, Caprioli J. Retinal ganglion cell death in experimental glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000;84:303-310.
12. Yucel YH, Zhang Q, Gupta N, Kaufman PL, Weinreb RN. Loss of neurons in magnocellular and parvocellular layers of the lateral geniculate nucleus in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118: 378-384.
13. Morgan JE. Retinal ganglion cell shrinkage in glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2002;11:365-370.
14. Sun H, Swanson WH, Arvidson B, Dul MW. Assessment of contrast gain signature in inferred magnocellular and parvocellular pathways in patients with glaucoma. Vision Res. 2008;48:2633-2641.
15. Greenstein VC, Halevy D, Zaidi Q, Koenig KL, Ritch RH. Chromatic and luminance system deficits in glaucoma. Vision Res. 1996;36: 621-629.
16. Alvarez S, Pierce G, Vingrys A, Benes S, Weber P, King-Smith P. Comparison of red-green, blue-yellow and achromatic losses in glaucoma. Vision Res. 1997;37:2295-2301.
17. Pearson P, Swanson WH, Fellman RL. Chromatic and achromatic defects in patients with progressing glaucoma. Vision Res. 2001; 41:1215-1227.
18. Martin L, Wanger P, Vancea L, Gothlin B. Concordance of high-pass resolution perimetry and frequency-doubling technology pe-rimetry results in glaucoma: no support for selective ganglion cell damage. J Glaucoma. 2003;12:40-44.
19. McKendrick AM, Badcock DR, Morgan WH. Psychophysical measurement of neural adaptation abnormalities in magnocellular and parvocellular pathways in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45:1846-1853.
20. Artes PH, Hutchison DM, Nicolela MT, LeBlanc RP, Chauhan BC. Threshold and variability properties of matrix frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46:2451-2457.
21. Spry PG, Hussin HM, Sparrow JM. Clinical evaluation of frequency doubling technology perimetry using the Humphrey Matrix 24-2 threshold strategy. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89:1031-1035.
22. Sun H, Dul MW, Swanson WH. Linearity can account for the similarity among conventional, frequency-doubling, and gabor-based perimetric tests in the glaucomatous macula. Optom Vis Sci. 2006;83:455-465.
23. Sample PA, Medeiros FA, Racette L, et al. Identifying glaucomatous vision loss with visual-function-specific perimetry in the diagnostic innovations in glaucoma study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006; 47:3381-3389.
24. Burgansky-Eliash Z, Wollstein G, Patel A, et al. Glaucoma detection with matrix and standard achromatic perimetry. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007;91:933-938.
25. Patel A, Wollstein G, Ishikawa H, Schuman JS. Comparison of visual field defects using matrix perimetry and standard achromatic perimetry. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:480-487.
26. Zarkovic A, Mora J, McKelvie J, Gamble G. Relationship between second-generation frequency doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in patients with glaucoma. Clin Exp Ophthal-mol. 2007;35:808-811.
27. Bozkurt B, Yilmaz PT, Irkec M. Relationship between Humphrey 30-2 SITA Standard Test, Matrix 30-2 threshold test, and Heidelberg retina tomograph in ocular hypertensive and glaucoma patients. J Glaucoma. 2008;17:203-210.
28. Tafreshi A, Sample PA, Liebmann JM, et al. Visual function-specific perimetry to identify glaucomatous visual loss using three different definitions of visual field abnormality. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50:1234-1240.
29. Clement CI, Goldberg I, Healey PR, Graham S. Humphrey matrix frequency doubling perimetry for detection of visual-field defects in open-angle glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009;93:582-588.
30. Nam YP, Park SB, Kang SY, Sung KR, Kook MS. Glaucoma diagnostic performance of Humphrey matrix and standard automated perimetry. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2009;53:482-485.
31. Prema R, George R, Hemamalini A, Sathyamangalam Ve R, Baskaran M, Vijaya L. Comparison of Humphrey MATRIX and Swedish interactive threshold algorithm standard strategy in detecting early glaucomatous visual field loss. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2009;57:207-211.
32. Crook JM, Lange-Malecki B, Lee BB, Valberg A. Visual resolution of macaque retinal ganglion cells. J Physiol. 1988;396:205-224.
33. Lee BB, Martin PR, Valberg A. Sensitivity of macaque ganglion cells to luminance and chromatic flicker. J Physiol. 1989;414:223-243.
34. Brenton RS, Argus WA. Fluctuations on the Humphrey and Octopus perimeters. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1987;28:767-771.
35. Swanson WH, Pan F, Lee BB. Chromatic temporal integration and retinal eccentricity: psychophysics, neurometric analysis and cortical pooling. Vision Res. 2008;48:2657-2662.
36. Lee BB, Sun H, Zucchini W. The temporal properties of the response of macaque ganglion cells and central mechanisms of flicker detection. J Vis. 2007;7:11-16.
37. Lee BB. Paths to colour in the retina. Clin Exp Optom. 2004;87: 239-248.
38. Derrington AM, Lennie P. Spatial and temporal contrast sensitivities of neurones in lateral geniculate nucleus of macaque. J Physiol. 1984;357:219-240.
39. Lee BB, Kremers J, Yeh T. Receptive fields of primate retinal ganglion cells studied with a novel technique. Vis Neurosci. 1998; 15:161-175.
40. Kaplan E, Shapley RM. The primate retina contains two types of ganglion cells with high and low contrast sensitivity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1986;83:2755-2757.
41. Crook JM, Lee BB, Tigwell DA, Valberg A. Thresholds to chromatic spots of cells in the macaque geniculate nucleus as compared to detection sensitivity in man. J Physiol. 1987;392:193-211.
42. Lee BB, Pokorny J, Smith VC, Martin PR, Valberg A. Luminance and chromatic modulation sensitivity of macaque ganglion cells and human observers. J Opt Soc Am A. 1990;7:2223-2236.
43. Harwerth RS, Smith EL 3rd, DeSantis L. Mechanisms mediating visual detection in static perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34:3011-3023.
44. Swanson WH. Time, color and phase. In: Kelly DH, ed. Visual Science and Engineering: Models and Applications. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.; 1993:191-225.
45. Pearson PM, Swanson WH. Chromatic contrast sensitivity: the role of absolute threshold and gain constant in differences between the fovea and the periphery. J Opt Soc Am A. 2000;17:232-243.
46. Pan F, Swanson WH. A cortical pooling model of spatial summation for perimetric stimuli. J Vis. 2006;6:1159-1171.
47. Hot A, Dul MW, Swanson WH. Development and evaluation of a contrast sensitivity perimetry test for patients with glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:3049-3057.
48. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J. Normal variability of static perimetric threshold values across the central visual field. Arch Ophthalmol. 1987;105:1544-1549.
49. Piltz JR, Starita RJ. Test-retest variability in glaucomatous visual fields (Letter). Am J Ophthalmol. 1990;109:109-111.
50. Henson DB, Chaudry S, Artes PH, Faragher EB, Ansons A. Response variability in the visual field: comparison of optic neuritis, glaucoma, ocular hypertension, and normal eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:417-421.
51. Weber AJ, Harman CD. Structure-function relations of parasol cells in the normal and glaucomatous primate retina. Invest Ophthal-mol Vis Sci. 2005;46:3197-3207.
52. Solomon SG, Peirce JW, Dhruv NT, Lennie P. Profound contrast adaptation early in the visual pathway. Neuron. 2004;42:155-162.
53. Kandel ER, Schwartz JH, Jessell TM. Principles of Neural Science. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2000.
54. Pokorny J, Smith VC. Psychophysical signatures associated with magnocellular and parvocellular pathway contrast gain. J Opt Soc Am A. 1997;14:2477-2486.