Dendro-somatic synaptic inputs to ganglion cells contradict receptive field and connectivity conventions in the mammalian retina

Kogo, Naoki and Michael Ariel. Membrane properties and monosynaptic retinal excitation of neurons in the turtle accessory optic system. J. Neurophysiol. 78: 614–627, 1997. Using an eye-attached isolated brain stem preparation of a turtle, Pseudemys scripta elegans, in conjunction with whole cell patch techniques, we recorded intracellular activity of accessory optic system neurons in the basal optic nucleus (BON). This technique offered long-lasting stable recordings of individual synaptic events. In the reduced preparation (most of the dorsal structures were removed), large spontaneous excitatory synaptic inputs [excitatory postsynaptic potentials (EPSPs)] were frequently recorded. Spontaneous inhibitory postsynaptic potentials were rarely observed except in few cases. Most EPSPs disappeared after injection of lidocaine into the retina. A few EPSPs of small size remained, suggesting that these EPSPs either were from intracranial sources or may have been miniature spontaneous synaptic potentials from retinal ganglion cell axon terminals. Population EPSPs were synchronously evoked by electrical stimulation of the contralateral optic nerve. Their constant onset latency and their ability to follow short-interval paired stimulation indicated that much of the population EPSP's response was monosynaptic. Visually evoked BON spikes and EPSP inputs to BON showed direction sensitivity when a moving pattern was projected onto the entire contralateral retina. With the use of smaller moving patterns, the receptive field of an individual BON cell was identified. A small spot of light, projected within the receptive field, guided the placement of a bipolar stimulation electrode to activate retinal ganglion cells that provided input to that BON cell. EPSPs evoked by this retinal microstimulation showed features of unitary EPSPs. Those EPSPs had distinct low current thresholds. Recruitment of other inputs was only evident when the stimulation level was increased substantially above threshold. The average size of evoked unitary EPSPs was 7.8 mV, confirming the large size of synaptic inputs of this system relative to nonsynaptic noise. EPSP shape was plotted (rise time vs. amplitude), with the use of either evoked unitary EPSPs or spontaneous EPSPs. Unlike samples of spontaneous EPSPs, data from many unitary EPSPs formed distinct clusters in these scatterplots, indicating that these EPSPs had a unique shape among the whole population of EPSPs. In most BON cells studied, hyperpolarization-activated channels caused a slow depolarization sag that reached a plateau within 0.5–1 s. This property suggests that BON cells may be more complicated than a simple site for convergence of direction-sensitive retinal ganglion cells to form a central retinal slip signal for control of oculomotor reflexes.

Download Full-text

Synaptic inputs to the ganglion cells in the tiger salamander retina.

The Journal of General Physiology ◽

10.1085/jgp.73.3.265 ◽

1979 ◽

Vol 73 (3) ◽

pp. 265-286 ◽

Cited By ~ 50

Author(s):

D F Wunk ◽

F S Werblin

Keyword(s):

Cell Membrane ◽

Receptive Field ◽

Ganglion Cell ◽

Time Course ◽

Ganglion Cells ◽

Hybrid Cell ◽

Amacrine Cells ◽

Inhibitory Input ◽

Tiger Salamander ◽

Synaptic Inputs

The postsynaptic potentials (PSPs) that form the ganglion cell light response were isolated by polarizing the cell membrane with extrinsic currents while stimulating at either the center or surround of the cell's receptive field. The time-course and receptive field properties of the PSPs were correlated with those of the bipolar and amacrine cells. The tiger salamander retina contains four main types of ganglion cell: "on" center, "off" center, "on-off", and a "hybrid" cell that responds transiently to center, but sustainedly, to surround illumination. The results lead to these inferences. The on-ganglion cell receives excitatory synpatic input from the on bipolars and that synapse is "silent" in the dark. The off-ganglion cell receives excitatory synaptic input from the off bipolars with this synapse tonically active in the dark. The on-off and hybrid ganglion cells receive a transient excitatory input with narrow receptive field, not simply correlated with the activity of any presynaptic cell. All cell types receive a broad field transient inhibitory input, which apparently originates in the transient amacrine cells. Thus, most, but not all, ganglion cell responses can be explained in terms of synaptic inputs from bipolar and amacrine cells, integrated at the ganglion cell membrane.

Download Full-text

A comparison of receptive-field and tracer-coupling size of amacrine and ganglion cells in the rabbit retina

Visual Neuroscience ◽

10.1017/s0952523800011846 ◽

1997 ◽

Vol 14 (6) ◽

pp. 1153-1165 ◽

Cited By ~ 28

Author(s):

Stewart A. Bloomfield ◽

Daiyan Xin

Keyword(s):

Receptive Field ◽

Ganglion Cells ◽

Electrical Coupling ◽

Receptive Fields ◽

Amacrine Cells ◽

Visual Signals ◽

Lateral Spread ◽

Field Size ◽

Electrical Networks ◽

Mammalian Retina

AbstractRecent studies have shown that amacrine and ganglion cells in the mammalian retina are extensively coupled as revealed by the intercellular movement of the biotinylated tracers biocytin and Neurobiotin. These demonstrations of tracer coupling suggest that electrical networks formed by proximal neurons (i.e. amacrine and ganglion cells) may underlie the lateral propagation of signals across the inner retina. We studied this question by comparing the receptive-field size, dendritic-field size, and extent of tracer coupling of amacrine and ganglion cells in the dark-adapted, supervised, isolated retina eyecup of the rabbit. Our results indicate that while the center-receptive fields of proximal neurons are approximately 15% larger than their corresponding dendritic diameters, this slight difference can be explained by factors other than electrical coupling such as tissue shrinkage associated with histological processing. However, the extent of tracer coupling of amacrine and ganglion cells was, on average, about twice the size of the corresponding receptive fields. Thus, the receptive field of an individual proximal neuron matched far more closely to its dendritic diameter than to the size of the tracer-coupled network of cells to which it belonged. The exception to this rule was the AII amacrine cells for which center-receptive fields were 2–3 times the size of their dendritic diameters but matched closely to the size of the tracer-coupled arrays. Thus, with the exception of AII cells, our data indicate that tracer coupling between proximal neurons is not associated with an enlargement of their receptive fields. Our results, then, provide no evidence for electrical coupling or, at least, indicate that extensive lateral spread of visual signals does not occur in the proximal mammalian retina.

Download Full-text

Inference of Nonlinear Spatial Subunits in Primate Retina with Spike-Triggered Clustering

10.1101/496422 ◽

2018 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Nishal P. Shah ◽

Nora Brackbill ◽

Colleen E. Rhoades ◽

Alexandra Kling ◽

Georges Goetz ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Receptive Field ◽

Population Model ◽

Prediction Accuracy ◽

Closed Loop ◽

Ganglion Cells ◽

Null Space ◽

Likelihood Estimation ◽

Response Prediction ◽

Synaptic Inputs ◽

Novel Method

AbstractIntegration of rectified synaptic inputs is a widespread nonlinear motif in sensory neuroscience. We present a novel method for maximum likelihood estimation of nonlinear subunits by soft-clustering spike-triggered stimuli. Subunits estimated from parasol ganglion cells recorded in macaque retina partitioned the receptive field into compact regions, likely representing bipolar cell inputs. Joint clustering with multiple RGCs revealed shared subunits in neighboring cells, producing a parsimonious population model. Closed-loop subunit validation was then performed by projecting white noise into the null space of the linear receptive field. Responses to these null stimuli were more accurately explained by a model with multiple subunits, and were stronger in OFF cells than ON cells. Presentation of natural stimuli containing jittering edges and textures also revealed greater response prediction accuracy with the subunit model. Finally, the generality of the approach was demonstrated by application to V1 data.

Download Full-text

Comparison of the responses of AII amacrine cells in the dark- and light-adapted rabbit retina

Visual Neuroscience ◽

10.1017/s0952523899164058 ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 16 (4) ◽

pp. 653-665 ◽

Cited By ~ 78

Author(s):

DAIYAN XIN ◽

STEWART A. BLOOMFIELD

Keyword(s):

Receptive Field ◽

Light Adaptation ◽

Amacrine Cells ◽

Bipolar Cells ◽

Rabbit Retina ◽

Response Component ◽

Synaptic Inputs ◽

Field Organization ◽

Receptive Field Organization ◽

Aii Amacrine Cells

We studied the light-evoked responses of AII amacrine cells in the rabbit retina under dark- and light-adapted conditions. In contrast to the results of previous studies, we found that AII cells display robust responses to light over a 6–7 log unit intensity range, well beyond the operating range of rod photoreceptors. Under dark adaptation, AII cells showed an ON-center/OFF-surround receptive-field organization. The intensity–response profile of the center-mediated response component followed a dual-limbed sigmoidal function indicating a transition from rod to cone mediation as stimulus intensities were increased. Following light adaptation, the receptive-field organization of AII cells changed dramatically. Light-adapted AII cells showed both ON- and OFF-responses to stimulation of the center receptive field, but we found no evidence for an antagonistic surround. Interestingly, the OFF-center response appeared first following rapid light adaptation and was then replaced gradually over a 1–4 min period by the emerging ON-center response component. Application of the metabotropic glutamate receptor agonist APB, the ionotropic glutamate blocker CNQX, 8-bromo-cGMP, and the nitric oxide donor SNAP all showed differential effects on the various center-mediated responses displayed by dark- and light-adapted AII cells. Taken together, these pharmacological results indicated that different synaptic circuits are responsible for the generation of the different AII cell responses. Specifically, the rod-driven ON-center responses are apparently derived from rod bipolar cell synaptic inputs, whereas the cone-driven ON-center responses arise from signals crossing the gap junctions between AII cells and ON-center cone bipolar cells. Additionally, the OFF-center response of light-adapted AII cells reflects direct synaptic inputs from OFF-center cone bipolar cells to AII dendritic processes in the distal inner plexiform layer.

Download Full-text

Spatial receptive field properties of rat retinal ganglion cells

Visual Neuroscience ◽

10.1017/s0952523811000307 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 28 (5) ◽

pp. 403-417 ◽

Cited By ~ 19

Author(s):

WALTER F. HEINE ◽

CHRISTOPHER L. PASSAGLIA

Keyword(s):

Receptive Field ◽

Ganglion Cell ◽

Retinal Ganglion Cells ◽

Ganglion Cells ◽

Cell Types ◽

Quantitative Information ◽

Retinal Ganglion ◽

X And Y Cells ◽

Y Cells

AbstractThe rat is a popular animal model for vision research, yet there is little quantitative information about the physiological properties of the cells that provide its brain with visual input, the retinal ganglion cells. It is not clear whether rats even possess the full complement of ganglion cell types found in other mammals. Since such information is important for evaluating rodent models of visual disease and elucidating the function of homologous and heterologous cells in different animals, we recorded from rat ganglion cells in vivo and systematically measured their spatial receptive field (RF) properties using spot, annulus, and grating patterns. Most of the recorded cells bore likeness to cat X and Y cells, exhibiting brisk responses, center-surround RFs, and linear or nonlinear spatial summation. The others resembled various types of mammalian W cell, including local-edge-detector cells, suppressed-by-contrast cells, and an unusual type with an ON–OFF surround. They generally exhibited sluggish responses, larger RFs, and lower responsiveness. The peak responsivity of brisk-nonlinear (Y-type) cells was around twice that of brisk-linear (X-type) cells and several fold that of sluggish cells. The RF size of brisk-linear and brisk-nonlinear cells was indistinguishable, with average center and surround diameters of 5.6 ± 1.3 and 26.4 ± 11.3 deg, respectively. In contrast, the center diameter of recorded sluggish cells averaged 12.8 ± 7.9 deg. The homogeneous RF size of rat brisk cells is unlike that of cat X and Y cells, and its implication regarding the putative roles of these two ganglion cell types in visual signaling is discussed.

Download Full-text