 |
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Previous Article | Next Article
The Journal of Neuroscience, December 1, 2001, 21(23):9445-9454
Temporal Contrast Adaptation in Salamander Bipolar Cells
Fred Rieke Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
This work investigates how the light responses of salamander bipolar cells adapt to changes in temporal contrast: changes in the depth of the temporal fluctuations in light intensity about the mean. Contrast affected the sensitivity of bipolar cells but not of photoreceptors or horizontal cells, suggesting that adaptation occurred in signal transfer from photoreceptors to bipolars. This suggestion was confirmed by recording from photoreceptor-bipolar pairs and observing a direct dependence of the gain of signal transfer on the contrast of the light input. After an increase in contrast, the onset of adaptation in the bipolar cell had a time constant of 1-2 sec, similar to a fast component of contrast adaptation in the light responses of retinal ganglion cells (Kim and Rieke, 2001
). Contrast adaptation was mediated by processes in the dendrites of both ON and OFF bipolars. The functional properties of adaptation differed for the two bipolar types, however, with contrast having a much more pronounced effect on the kinetics of the responses of OFF cells than ON cells.
Key words: contrast gain control; contrast adaptation; bipolar cell; adaptation; temporal contrast; retinal signal processing
INTRODUCTION
A general problem sensory neurons face is adjusting their operational range to match the range of the input signals they receive. This is particularly clear for vision, in which the mean light intensity and the contrast (the extent of fluctuations in light intensity about the mean) vary substantially in different visual environments. The visual system handles these differences in input signals by adjusting its sensitivity, or adapting. Adaptation includes mechanisms sensitive to the mean light intensity (for review, see Walraven et al., 1990
Contrast adaptation is widely viewed as a cortical phenomena, and there is good evidence that cortical mechanisms contribute (Albrecht et al., 1984
Retinal contrast adaptation shows a range of spatial and temporal properties: the spatial extent of the signal controlling contrast adaptation differs between ON and OFF ganglion cells (Smirnakis et al., 1997
We found previously that contrast adaptation included contributions from spike generation in retinal ganglion cells and from unidentified sites within the retinal circuitry (Kim and Rieke, 2001
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Recording procedures. All experiments used retinas from larval tiger salamanders (Ambystoma tigrinum; from Charles Sullivan, Nashville, TN). Salamanders were dark adapted overnight, and retinas were isolated under infrared light (Kim and Rieke, 2001
Light-evoked current and voltage responses of retinal cells were measured in a slice preparation. A piece of retina ~1 × 2 mm was embedded in low gelling temperature agar (Sigma, St. Louis, MO), immersed in cold HEPES-buffered Ames medium (Sigma), and sliced in 300-µm-thick sections on a vibrating microtome (Leica, Wetzlar, Germany). Slices were transferred to a recording chamber and held in place with a coarse nylon grid glued to a platinum weighting ring. The chamber was placed on the stage of an upright microscope equipped with an infrared viewing system. Slices were continuously superfused with a bicarbonate Ringer's solution containing (in mM): 110 NaCl, 2 KCl, 30 NaHCO3, 1.5 CaCl2, 1.6 MgCl2, and 10 glucose; pH was 7.4 when equilibrated with 5% CO2-95% O2 and osmolarity was 270-275 mOsm. The volume of the recording chamber was ~300 µl, and the superfusion rate was 1-2 ml/min. All experiments were at 20-22°C.
Light produced by a light-emitting diode (LED) was focussed on the slice through the bottom of the recording chamber. An LED with a peak output at 470 nm was used to stimulate rods, and one with a peak output at 640 nm was used to stimulate L cones. The light stimuli were spatially uniform and illuminated a circular area 650 µm in diameter centered on the recorded cell. The temporal contrast of the light stimulus was controlled by adding Gaussian fluctuations to the signal controlling the light output of the LED. The Gaussian fluctuations were low-pass filtered at either 10 (for rods) or 30 (for cones) Hz, as noted in the figure legends. The contrast of this stimulus was defined as the SD of the light intensity divided by the mean. Light intensities measured at the preparation are given in the figure legends.
Electrical responses were measured using either perforated-patch or whole-cell recordings and an Axopatch 200B patch-clamp amplifier (Axon Instruments, Foster City, CA); recording configurations are noted in the figure legends. Patch pipettes were filled with an internal solution containing (in mM): 125 K-aspartate, 10 KCl, 10 HEPES, 5 N-methylglucamine (NMG)-N-hydroxyethylethylenediaminetriacetic acid (HEDTA), 1 CaCl2, 1 ATP, 0.1 GTP, and 0.1 mM calcein, pH was adjusted to 7.2 with NMG-OH (and osmolarity was 260-265 mOsm). For perforated-patch recordings, the pipette solution also contained 1 mg/ml amphotericin-B (solubilized formulation; Sigma), and the pipette tip was filled with amphotericin-free solution. Filled pipettes had resistances of 8-10 M
, and the series resistance during recording was 20-40 M
60 mV; in current-clamp recordings, the holding current was between 0 and
Data analysis. The effect of contrast on the amplitude and kinetics of the light response of a cell was measured using a static nonlinearity model that provided a relatively simple description of how continuous light inputs were transformed into cellular responses (Sakai et al., 1995
View larger version (27K):[in this window]
[in a new window]
Figure 1. Static-nonlinearity model. A, The transformation between light inputs and cellular response was described using a model consisting of a linear filter followed by a time-independent or static nonlinearity. The filter and static nonlinearity were calculated from recordings of 5-10 min of the response of a cell to a fluctuating light input. B, Linear filter for a current-clamped ON bipolar cell stimulated with a 30% contrast light input. The inset shows the response of a cell to a 1 sec light step. C, Static nonlinearity determined by plotting the measured response against the linear prediction formed by convolving the light input with the linear filter in B. Each point represents the average measured current (y-axis) for a particular value of the linear prediction (x-axis). Error bars are SE and are mostly obscured by the data points. D, Short section of the measured and predicted response. Mean light intensity, 20,300 photons µm 2 sec
The linear filter and static nonlinearity were determined from recordings of 5-10 min of the response of a cell to light inputs of a given contrast. Figure 1 shows an example of this analysis for responses of a current-clamped ON bipolar cell to a 30% contrast light input. Figure 1B shows the linear filter; convolving this filter with the light input provides the best linear estimate of the voltage response of a cell given the light input (Wiener, 1949
Figure 1D compares a short section of the measured voltage response with the prediction from the linear filter and static nonlinearity in Figure 1, B and C. Although the prediction captures much of the structure in the measured response, there are also clear differences. In principle, these differences could reflect either noise in the measured response or a failure of the model. To distinguish between these possibilities, differences in the individual measured responses to a repeated stimulus were compared with differences between the measured and predicted response. The extent of trial-to-trial fluctuations in the response of a cell was determined by measuring the correlation between the average response and the individual responses to 15-30 repeats of a 20 sec stimulus. In four such experiments, the average correlation was 0.76. This correlation was compared with the average correlation between the response predicted by the static nonlinearity model and the individual measured responses, which was 0.70 in the same four cells. Thus, >90% of the light-dependent structure in the measured response was well predicted by the static nonlinearity model.
The model of Figure 1 was used to study contrast adaptation by comparing linear filters and static nonlinearities measured for light inputs of two contrasts. In all cells analyzed, the effect of contrast could be restricted to changes in the linear filter, greatly simplifying interpretation of the results. For a given contrast, the linear filter and static nonlinearity are unique up to a single scale factor. Thus, both the y-axis scaling of the filter in Figure 1B and the x-axis scaling of the static nonlinearity in Figure 1C can be multiplied by a factor
without changing the prediction of the model, because the rescaling of the filter amplitude is offset by the change in the static nonlinearity. When linear filters and static nonlinearities for two contrasts were compared,
RESULTS
The experiments described below indicate that signal transfer from rods and cones to bipolar cells provides the first site of contrast adaptation in the retina. The onset and offset of this adaptation were relatively rapid and contributed to a fast-onset component of contrast adaptation in retinal ganglion cells. Contrast adaptation differed both functionally and mechanistically in ON and OFF bipolars.
Bipolar cells provide the first site of contrast adaptation
Two results indicate that the light responses of bipolar cells adapt to the contrast of the light input but that those of photoreceptors and horizontal cells do not. First, after an increase in contrast, the amplitude of the light response of a bipolar immediately increased and then gradually declined, suggesting a time-dependent change in sensitivity induced by the contrast change. Second, the steady-state sensitivity of the light responses of bipolar cells decreased after an increase in contrast. Both effects were small or absent in photoreceptors and horizontal cells.
Response time course after a change in contrast
A signature of adaptation is a change in sensitivity over time after a change in the input signal. Thus, contrast adaptation should cause gradual changes in the amplitude of the response of a cell after a change in contrast. To test for such changes, a randomly fluctuating light stimulus was switched between 10 and 30% contrast every 20 sec while recording the resulting response in a photoreceptor, horizontal cell, or bipolar cell. Figure 2A-C shows voltage recordings from a cone (A), horizontal cell (B), and OFF bipolar cell (C) to a single cycle of this alternating contrast signal. The timing of the contrast change is shown in the stimulus trace at the bottom of the figure.
The amplitude of the light responses of photoreceptors and horizontal cells changed quickly after an increase (0 sec) or decrease (20 sec) in contrast and did not show time-dependent structure that would suggest the cells were adapting. The absence of time-dependent structure was captured more clearly by measuring the time-dependent variance across 15-30 cycles of the contrast signal. Independent stimuli were used in each cycle, and thus the variance measured the strength of the response of a cell to the fluctuating stimulus. In both photoreceptors (Fig. 2D) and horizontal cells (Fig. 2E), the variance reached a steady-state level within ~0.2 sec after a change in contrast and maintained this level throughout the 20 sec duration of the contrast signal. A similar lack of time dependence was observed in the responses of four rods, eight cones, and six horizontal cells. The responses of bipolar cells, on the other hand, did show time-dependent structure. After an increase in contrast, the amplitude (Fig. 2C) and the variance (Fig. 2F) of the response increased rapidly and then declined to a steady level; after a decrease in contrast, the variance fell to an initial minimum and then gradually increased. A similar time dependence was observed in nine bipolar cells. These results suggest that bipolar cells adapt to temporal contrast.
View larger version (39K):[in this window]
[in a new window]
Figure 2. Cone, horizontal, and bipolar responses to an alternating contrast signal. The stimulus alternated between 30 and 10% contrast every 20 sec (see stimulus trace at bottom). Current-clamp responses to a single cycle of this stimulus are shown in A for a cone, B for a horizontal cell, and C for an OFF bipolar cell. The time dependence of the amplitude of the response of each cell to the fluctuating contrast stimulus was measured by calculating the time-dependent variance from 15-30 cycles of the stimulus. The fluctuating stimulus was independent in each cycle. The variance is shown in D for the cone, E for the horizontal cell, and F for the bipolar. The variance measured in the cone and horizontal cell showed little time-dependent structure after a change in contrast, whereas the variance measured in the bipolar cell showed transients after increases (at t = 0) and decreases (at t = 20 sec) in contrast. Mean light intensity, 18,800 photons µm
Contrast-dependent changes in sensitivity
The static nonlinearity model (see Materials and Methods) (Fig. 1) was used to determine how contrast affected the gain and kinetics of the responses of photoreceptors, horizontal cells, and bipolar cells. This model predicts the response of a cell to continuous light inputs of a particular contrast by passing the light intensity through a linear filter followed by a time-independent or static nonlinearity (Fig. 1). The linear filter (Fig. 3A) estimates the time course of the response of a cell to a brief light flash in the presence of a fluctuating contrast signal. Thus, for the cone in Figure 3A, the filter predicts that the cell would respond to a brief light flash at time 0 with a hyperpolarization lasting ~0.2 sec. The static nonlinearity (Fig. 3D) describes the relationship between the output of this linear filter and the measured response. In general, this relationship is nonlinear, reflecting processes such as saturation or activation of cellular conductances. This model provided a relatively compact description (a single filter and time-independent nonlinearity) of how the cell responded to light inputs of a particular contrast. A key aspect of this model is that it separates instantaneous nonlinearities in the response of a cell from changes in sensitivity attributable to adaptation.
Contrast-dependent changes in the amplitude and kinetics of the response of a cell were measured by comparing filters and nonlinearities for different contrast inputs. High- and low-contrast stimuli were interleaved to ensure that adaptation was reversible. A section of record after each change in contrast was discarded to permit the response of a cell to reach steady state. Figure 3A-C shows linear filters measured at 10 and 30% contrast for the cone, horizontal cell, and OFF bipolar cell from Figure 2. Figure 3D-F plots the corresponding static nonlinearities. In each cell, the nonlinearities had similar shapes at high and low contrast and thus did not contribute to contrast-dependent changes in sensitivity (see Materials and Methods). A similar contrast independence of the shape of the static nonlinearity was found in all of the photoreceptors, horizontal cells, and bipolar cells studied. This greatly simplified characterization of contrast adaptation as the effect of contrast on the response of a cell was restricted to changes in the linear filter. In subsequent figures, the static nonlinearities are not shown, and the linear filters at high and low contrast are scaled by a common factor so that the filter at low contrast has unit amplitude. Linear filters measured at 10 and 30% contrast were nearly identical in cones (Fig. 3A) and horizontal cells (Fig. 3B) but differed considerably in bipolar cells (Fig. 3C). The ratio of the amplitude of the filter at high and low contrast was 0.98 ± 0.04 (mean ± SEM) in four rods, 1.01 ± 0.04 in eight cones, 0.96 ± 0.03 in six horizontal cells, and 0.79 ± 0.02 in 42 bipolar cells. Contrast had a similar effect on the light responses of current- and voltage-clamped bipolar cells (see Fig. 8); thus, in most experiments, cells were voltage clamped to minimize the effects of voltage-activated conductances. Experiments like those illustrated in Figure 3 show that the sensitivity of photoreceptors and horizontal cells changed little after a change in contrast, whereas the sensitivity of bipolar cells changed substantially.
View larger version (22K):[in this window]
[in a new window]
Figure 3. Contrast adaptation in a current-clamped cone, horizontal cell, and OFF bipolar cell measured using the static nonlinearity model. Same cells and recording conditions as Figure 2. The contrast was alternated between 10 and 30% every 20 sec. Linear filters and static nonlinearities were calculated from 15-30 cycles of this stimulus, excluding the first 4 sec of record after a change in contrast. Linear filters measured for 10% (thick trace) and 30% (thin trace) contrast stimuli are shown in A for the cone, B for the horizontal cell, and C for the OFF bipolar cell. Static nonlinearities are shown in D for the cone, E for the horizontal cell, and F for the bipolar cell. In each case, the static nonlinearities at 10 and 30% contrast overlapped and hence did not contribute to contrast adaptation. Linear filters at 10 and 30% contrast were similar in the cone and horizontal cell but differed substantially in the bipolar.
Contrast affects the gain of photoreceptor-bipolar signal transfer
The experiments of Figures 2 and 3 indicate that bipolar cells, but not photoreceptors or horizontal cells, adapt to temporal contrast, suggesting that contrast affects the gain of signal transfer from photoreceptors to bipolar cells. Simultaneous recordings from photoreceptors and bipolar cells provided direct evidence for this conclusion by bypassing the phototransduction process and measuring the gain of signal transfer directly. The gain of signal transfer was measured by injecting a depolarizing current pulse into a photoreceptor and measuring the resulting postsynaptic response in a bipolar cell. This experiment was repeated in the presence and absence of a 25% contrast light input, and the gain of signal transfer was compared in the two conditions. No attempt was made to disrupt gap junctions, so the bipolar response represents changes in transmitter release from a collection of electrically coupled photoreceptors (Schwartz, 1976
Figure 4B shows results from a similar experiment on a rod-OFF bipolar pair. In this case, the experiment was performed in the presence of 470 nm light, which produced responses in rods but was too dim to elicit responses in cones. The bottom panel of Figure 4B shows the average voltage response in the rod when the holding current was changed from
View larger version (19K):[in this window]
[in a new window]
Figure 4. Contrast affected gain of signal transfer from photoreceptors to bipolars. The gain of signal transfer was measured by injecting depolarizing current into the photoreceptor and measuring the resulting postsynaptic response in the bipolar cell. This was repeated in the presence and absence of a 25% contrast light input. A, Measurements from a current-clamped cone and voltage-clamped ON bipolar cell. The cone current was stepped from
Properties of contrast adaptation in bipolar cells
Time course of onset and offset
The onset and offset of contrast adaptation in the retina occur on several time scales (Victor, 1987
View larger version (26K):[in this window]
[in a new window]
Figure 5. Kinetics of onset and offset of contrast adaptation. An OFF bipolar cell was voltage clamped while the contrast of the light input was switched between 10 and 30% every 10 sec. The time-dependent variance was computed from 21 repetitions of this stimulus. The smooth curves fit to the variance are single exponentials, with time constants of 2.1 sec (fit between 0 and 10 sec) and 6.2 sec (fit between 10 and 20 sec). Mean light intensity, 18,200 photons µm
ON and OFF bipolars adapt differently to contrast
Contrast adaptation differed in ON and OFF bipolar cells. Although contrast affected the amplitude of the light responses in both types of bipolar cell, the effect of contrast on the response kinetics was pronounced in OFF bipolars and small or absent in ON bipolars. ON and OFF bipolars were distinguished based on their responses to 1 sec light increments. Under voltage clamp, a light increment generated an outward current in an OFF bipolar (Fig. 6A, inset) and an inward current in an ON bipolar (Fig. 6B, inset). No attempt was made to divide ON and OFF bipolars into subtypes (Burkhardt and Fahey, 1998
Contrast adaptation was measured by presenting 10 and 30% contrast inputs and characterizing the amplitude and kinetics of the light response of a cell using the static nonlinearity model. Figure 6 shows linear filters for an OFF bipolar (Fig. 6A) and an ON bipolar (Fig. 6B), both measured under voltage clamp. The static nonlinearities did not change with contrast (data not shown), and thus contrast adaptation was restricted to changes in the linear filters. In the OFF bipolar, increasing the contrast from 10 to 30% decreased the amplitude and the time-to-peak of the filter. In the ON bipolar, increasing the contrast from 10 to 30% produced a clear change in amplitude but little or no change in the time-to-peak. Figure 6C summarizes measurements of the amplitude of the filter at high contrast relative to that at low contrast for 17 OFF bipolars and 25 ON bipolars, all measured under voltage clamp. Contrast had a slightly larger effect on the amplitude of the light responses of OFF bipolars than ON bipolars. Figure 6D summarizes measurements of the time-to-peak of the linear filter at high contrast relative to that at low contrast. The change in response kinetics was clear in OFF bipolars and small or absent in ON bipolars. A similar asymmetry between the effect of contrast on the responses of ON and OFF bipolars was observed in current-clamp recordings. This asymmetry contributes to an ON-OFF asymmetry in the light responses of salamander retinal ganglion cells (Chander and Chichilnisky, 1999
View larger version (21K):[in this window]
[in a new window]
Figure 6. Contrast adaptation differed in ON and OFF bipolar cells. Contrast adaptation was measured for 10 and 30% contrast light inputs using the static nonlinearity model as in Figures 1 and 3. Linear filters measuring the amplitude and kinetics of the current response of a cell are shown in A for a voltage-clamped OFF bipolar and in B for a voltage-clamped ON bipolar. Insets show responses to 1 sec light steps. The holding potential in both cases was
Contrast adaptation affects rod- and cone-mediated responses
Contrast affected the amplitude and kinetics of the bipolar responses over a wide range of light intensities. Thus, contrast adaptation acted on signals from both rod and cone photoreceptors. Rod-dominated responses were studied using 470 nm light at mean intensities of 4-40 photons µm
View larger version (14K):[in this window]
[in a new window]
Figure 7. Contrast affected both rod- and cone-mediated responses. A, Linear filters for a voltage-clamped OFF bipolar cell for 10 and 30% contrast light inputs using 470 nm light at a mean intensity of 24 photons µm
Mechanism of contrast adaptation in bipolar cells
The effect of contrast on the sensitivity of bipolar cells and lack of an effect on the sensitivities of photoreceptors and horizontal cells (Fig. 3) indicates that contrast adaptation is mediated after signals are transferred to the bipolar cell. The experiments described below tested several possible mechanisms: (1) voltage-activated conductances in the bipolar soma (Mao et al., 1998
Voltage-activated conductances in bipolar soma make a minimal contribution
If voltage-activated conductances in the bipolar soma make a substantial contribution to contrast adaptation, the effect of contrast on the light response of a bipolar should differ when the bipolar voltage is free to change or held constant. The extent of contrast adaptation under current and voltage clamp was measured using the static nonlinearity model as in Figures 1 and 3. Figure 8A shows linear filters at 10 and 30% contrast for a voltage-clamped OFF bipolar cell. Contrast affected the amplitude and kinetics of the filter. Figure 8B shows linear filters for current-clamp responses from the same cell. Contrast again affected the amplitude and kinetics of the filter, and the magnitude of these effects was similar to that observed under voltage clamp.
The extent of contrast adaptation with the membrane voltage clamped or free to change was compared in seven OFF bipolars and five ON bipolars; collected results are shown in Figure 8, C and D. Figure 8C plots the change in the amplitude of the linear filter measured under voltage clamp against that measured under current clamp, with each point representing measurements from a single cell as in Figure 8, A and B. Figure 8D compares the change in time-to-peak of the filters measured under voltage and current clamp. In each case, the points cluster near the line of identity, indicating that the effect of contrast on the amplitude and kinetics of the light responses of bipolar cells was similar under current and voltage clamp. These experiments show that voltage-activated conductances in the bipolar soma make little or no contribution to contrast adaptation.
View larger version (24K):[in this window]
[in a new window]
Figure 8. Contrast adaptation was similar under current and voltage clamp. A, Linear filters for a voltage-clamped OFF bipolar cell for 10 and 30% contrast light inputs. Holding potential was
Contrast adaptation persists without amacrine feedback
To test whether the effect of contrast could be attributable to amacrine feedback to the bipolar synaptic terminal, contrast adaptation was measured with the amacrine feedback working normally and with it suppressed. Amacrine feedback was suppressed with picrotoxin and strychnine, inhibitors of the GABA (Maguire et al., 1989
View larger version (25K):[in this window]
[in a new window]
Figure 9. Amacrine and horizontal cells contributed little to contrast adaptation. A, Linear filters for a voltage-clamped OFF bipolar cell superfused in normal Ringer's solution for light inputs of 10 and 30% contrast. B, Linear filters for the same cell as in A superfused in Ringer's solution containing 150 µM picrotoxin and 5 µM strychnine. Holding potential was
Contrast adaptation persists when horizontal inputs to bipolars are suppressed
To test whether the effect of contrast could be attributable to horizontal cell input to the bipolar dendrites, contrast adaptation was compared before and after suppressing the horizontal-bipolar synapse with bicuculline, an inhibitor of GABA receptors on the bipolar dendrites. The effect of contrast was essentially unchanged by suppression of horizontal input to bipolars. Figure 9, D and E, compares the extent of contrast adaptation of a voltage-clamped OFF bipolar cell superfused with normal Ringer's solution (Fig. 9D) or with Ringer's solution containing 5 µM bicuculline (Fig. 9E). Contrast adaptation was similar in the two conditions. Figure 9F collects results from seven such experiments, plotting the effect of contrast on the amplitude of the response of a cell in bicuculline (y-axis) against that in Ringer's solution (x-axis). Contrast adaptation was essentially unchanged in the presence of bicuculline. The average amplitude of the filter at high contrast relative to that at low contrast in these seven cells was 0.80 ± 0.05 (mean ± SEM) in both Ringer's solution and bicuculline. Thus, horizontal cell input to bipolars does not make a substantial contribution to contrast adaptation.Ca2+ buffers eliminate contrast adaptation in OFF bipolars
The experiments of Figure 9 show that contrast adaptation persists when a bipolar cell is voltage clamped and amacrine feedback to the bipolar terminal is suppressed. Under these conditions, the voltage in the axon terminal should not change, and thus conductances in the axon terminal do not contribute significantly to contrast adaptation. The similarity of contrast adaptation under current and voltage clamp (Fig. 8) indicates that conductances in the soma do not make significant contributions. Thus, Figures 8 and 9 indicate that most of the contrast adaptation in the light response of a bipolar is generated in its dendrites. Several studies have identified Ca2+-dependent gain controls in the dendrites of ON bipolar cells (Shiells and Falk, 1999
Contrast adaptation in ON bipolars had little or no dependence on the Ca2+ buffer concentration. Figure 10D shows linear filters at 10 and 30% contrast for a voltage-clamped ON bipolar dialyzed with a solution containing 1 mM HEDTA. Figure 10E shows filters for a voltage-clamped ON bipolar dialyzed with a solution containing 10 mM HEDTA. In both cases, the sensitivity of the light response of a cell decreased with increases in contrast. Figure 10F collects results from ON bipolars dialyzed with high and low concentrations of Ca2+ buffer and with native buffers intact. Contrast adaptation was similar in all three conditions. Contrast adaptation also persisted in voltage-clamped ON bipolar cells dialyzed with a solution containing 5 mM Br2BAPTA (data not shown). In eight cells dialyzed with Br2BAPTA, the amplitude of the linear filter for 30% contrast inputs relative to 10% contrast inputs was 0.81 ± 0.04 (mean ± SEM), again similar to the extent of contrast adaptation with the native Ca2+ buffers intact. The results summarized in Figure 10 indicate that Ca2+-dependent mechanisms in the bipolar dendrites contribute to contrast adaptation in OFF, but not ON, bipolars. This difference may help explain why OFF bipolar cells adapt more strongly to contrast changes than ON bipolars (Fig. 6).
View larger version (29K):[in this window]
[in a new window]
Figure 10. High concentrations of Ca2+ buffers suppress contrast adaptation in OFF, but not ON, bipolars. Contrast adaptation was compared in whole-cell recordings from bipolar cells dialyzed with internal solutions containing either 1 or 10 mM of the Ca2+ buffer HEDTA. The total Ca2+ in the internal solutions was changed along with the Ca2+ buffer concentration to keep the free Ca2+ constant. A, Linear filters for 10 and 30% contrast light inputs for a voltage-clamped OFF bipolar dialyzed with 1 mM HEDTA. Holding potential was
DISCUSSION
The experiments described here lead to three conclusions about contrast adaptation in salamander bipolar cells: (1) bipolar cells, but not horizontal cells or photoreceptors, adapt to temporal contrast; (2) contrast adaptation in the bipolars has a relatively fast onset and offset; and (3) the functional properties of contrast adaptation in ON and OFF bipolars differ. The properties of contrast adaptation in salamander bipolar cells are discussed below and compared with adaptation in retinal ganglion cells.
Contrast gain and contrast adaptation
Contrast adaptation in signal transfer from photoreceptors to bipolars serves an important role in protecting against saturation. For contrast steps about a steady light level, the contrast gain of salamander bipolar cells is 5-10 times higher than that of cones (Burkhardt and Fahey, 1998
Time course of onset and offset in bipolar and ganglion cells
After an increase in contrast, the onset of adaptation in the currents measured at the ganglion cell soma included fast (1-2 sec) and slow (10-20 sec) components (Kim and Rieke, 2001
The different temporal components of contrast adaptation likely play different functional roles in retinal signal processing. The slow onset form of contrast adaptation observed in the responses of retinal ganglion cells (Smirnakis et al., 1997
The onset and offset of contrast adaptation follow different time courses in both bipolars (Fig. 5) and ganglion cells (Smirnakis et al., 1997
Functional and mechanistic differences between ON and OFF bipolars
The functional properties of contrast adaptation differed for ON and OFF bipolar cells (Fig. 6). Increases in contrast had a similar effect on the amplitude of the light responses in ON and OFF cells. Changes in contrast, however, had a much more pronounced effect on the kinetics of the response of OFF bipolars than ON bipolars. In salamander retinal ganglion cells, changes in contrast had a greater effect on both the amplitude and kinetics of the light response in OFF cells than ON cells (Chander and Chichilnisky, 1999
In addition to the difference in functional properties, the mechanisms mediating contrast adaptation in ON and OFF bipolars differed (Fig. 10). In both cell types, contrast adaptation was mediated by mechanisms in the dendrites. In OFF bipolars, suppressing changes in Ca2+ eliminated contrast adaptation, indicating that a Ca2+-dependent gain control in the dendrites was responsible. In ON bipolars, suppressing Ca2+ changes had little or no effect on contrast adaptation. Adaptation in ON bipolars could be mediated by desensitization of glutamate receptors or regulation of the second-messenger cascade coupling the receptors to channels (Nawy, 1999
Mean and contrast adaptation in the retina
The output signals of retinal ganglion cells adapt to both the mean light intensity (for review, see Walraven et al., 1990
At high light levels, the mean and contrast of a visual scene are primarily independent, with the mean determined primarily by the illuminating light source and the contrast by the distribution of reflectances in the scene. At low light levels, the mean and contrast of the light inputs cannot change independently because of quantal fluctuations in the incident photons. Indeed, the form of adaptation operating at the lowest light intensity is mediated by mechanisms in the retinal circuitry controlled by quantal fluctuations in the light input (Donner et al., 1990
Several observations suggest that adaptation to the mean light intensity and the fluctuations about the mean are primarily independent in the outer retina. First, photoreceptors contribute to adaptation to the mean light level (for review, see Walraven et al., 1990
FOOTNOTES Received March 6, 2001; revised Sept. 10, 2001; accepted Sept. 13, 2001.
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grant EY-11850 and the McKnight Foundation. I thank Cecilia Armstrong, Divya Chander, E. J. Chichilnisky, Greg Field, Josh Gold, Kerry Kim, and Maria McKinley for helpful discussions and Eric Martinson for excellent technical assistance.
Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Fred Rieke at the above address. E-mail: rieke{at}u.washington.edu.
REFERENCES
- Albrecht DG, Farrar SB, Hamilton DB (1984) Spatial contrast adaptation characteristics of neurones recorded in the cat's visual cortex. J Physiol (Lond) 347:713-739
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Attwell D, Wilson M, Wu SM (1984) A quantitative analysis of interactions between photoreceptors in the salamander (Ambystoma) retina. J Physiol (Lond) 352:703-737
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Berry MJ, Brivanlou IH, Jordan TA, Meister M (1999) Anticipation of moving stimuli by the retina. Nature 398:334-338[Medline].
- Brown SP, Masland RH (2001) Spatial scale and cellular substrate of contrast adaptation by retinal ganglion cells. Nat Neurosci 4:48-51.
- Burkhardt DA, Fahey PK (1998) Contrast enhancement and distributed encoding by bipolar cells in the retina. J Neurophysiol 80:1070-1081
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Burkhardt DA, Fahey PK (1999) Contrast rectification and distributed encoding by ON-OFF amacrine cells in the retina. J Neurophysiol 261:1676-1688.
- Capovilla M, Hare WA, Owen WG (1987) Voltage gain of the signal transfer from retinal rods to bipolar cells in the tiger salamander. J Physiol (Lond) 391:125-140
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Chander D, Chichilnisky EJ (1999) Contrast adaptation and gain changes in salamander and monkey retina. Soc Neurosci Abstr 25:1431.
- Chander D, Chichilnisky EJ (2001) Adaptation to temporal contrast in primate and salamander retina. J Neurosci, in press.
- Chichilnisky EJ (2001) A simple white noise analysis of neuronal light responses. Network 12:199-213[Web of Science][Medline].
- Cook PB, Lukasiewicz PD, McReynolds JS (2000) GABAC receptors control adaptive changes in a glycinergic inhibitory pathway in salamander retina. J Neurosci 20:806-812
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- DeWeese M, Zador A (1998) Asymmetric dynamics in optimal variance adaptation. Neural Comput 10:1179-1202[Web of Science].
- Donner K, Copenhagen DR, Reuter T (1990) Weber and noise adaptation in the retina of the toad Bufo marinus. J Gen Physiol 95:733-753
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Kim KJ, Rieke F (2001) Temporal contrast adaptation in the input and output signals of salamander retinal ganglion cells. J Neurosci 21:287-299
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Koutalos Y, Yau K-W (1996) Regulation of sensitivity in vertebrate rod photoreceptors by calcium. Trends Neurosci 19:73-81[Web of Science][Medline].
- Maguire G, Lukasiewicz P, Werblin F (1989) Amacrine cell interactions underlying the response to change in the tiger salamander retina. J Neurosci 9:726-735[Abstract].
- Mangel SC (1991) Analysis of the horizontal cell contribution to the receptive field surround of ganglion cells in the rabbit retina. J Physiol (Lond) 442:211-234
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Mao BQ, Macleish PR, Victor JD (1998) The intrinsic dynamics of retinal bipolar cells isolated from tiger salamander. Vis Neurosci 15:425-438[Web of Science][Medline].
- Maple BR, Wu SM (1998) Glycinergic synaptic inputs to bipolar cells in the salamander retina. J Physiol (Lond) 506:731-744
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Meister M, Berry MJ (1999) The neural code of the retina. Neuron 22:435-450[Web of Science][Medline].
- Nawy S (1999) The metabotropic receptor mGluR6 may signal through Go but not phosphodiesterase, in retinal bipolar cells. J Neurosci 19:2938-2944
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Nawy S (2000) Regulation of the on bipolar cell mGluR6 pathway by Ca2+. J Neurosci 20:4471-4479
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Ohzawa I, Sclar G, Freeman RD (1985) Contrast gain control in the cat's visual system. J Neurophysiol 54:651-667
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Sakai HM, Wang JL, Naka K (1995) Contrast gain control in the lower vertebrate retinas. J Gen Physiol 105:815-835
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Sanchez-Vives MV, Nowak LG, McCormick DA (2000) Membrane mechanisms underlying contrast adaptation in cat area 17 in vivo. J Neurosci 20:4267-4285
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Schwartz EA (1976) Electrical properties of the rod syncytium in the retina of the turtle. J Physiol (Lond) 257:379-406
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Shapley R (1997) Retinal physiology: adapting to the changing scene. Curr Biol 7:R421-R423[Web of Science][Medline].
- Shiells RA, Falk G (1999) A rise in intracellular Ca2+ underlies light adaptation in dogfish retinal "on" bipolar cells. J Physiol (Lond) 514:343-350
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Smirnakis SM, Berry MJ, Warland DK, Bialek W, Meister M (1997) Retinal processing adapts to image contrast and spatial scale. Nature 386:69-73[Medline].
- Victor JD (1987) The dynamics of the cat retinal X cell centre. J Physiol (Lond) 386:219-246
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .- Walraven J, Enroth-Cugell C, Hood DC, MacLeod DIA, Schnapf JL (1990) The control of visual sensitivity. In: Visual perception: the neurophysiological foundations (Spillmann L, Werner SJ, eds), pp 53-101. San Diego: Academic.
- Wiener N (1949) In: Extrapolation, interpolation and smoothing of stationary time series. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
- Wu SM, Gao F, Maple BR (2000) Functional architecture of synapses in the inner retina: segregation of visual signals by stratification of bipolar cell axon terminals. J Neurosci 20:4462-4470
[Abstract/Free Full Text] .
Copyright © 2001 Society for Neuroscience 0270-6474/01/21239445-10$05.00/0
This article has been cited by other articles:
A. J. Camp, C. Tailby, and S. G. Solomon
Adaptable Mechanisms That Regulate the Contrast Response of Neurons in the Primate Lateral Geniculate Nucleus
J. Neurosci., April 15, 2009; 29(15): 5009 - 5021.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
A. Horsager, S. H. Greenwald, J. D. Weiland, M. S. Humayun, R. J. Greenberg, M. J. McMahon, G. M. Boynton, and I. Fine
Predicting Visual Sensitivity in Retinal Prosthesis Patients
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., April 1, 2009; 50(4): 1483 - 1491.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
D. L. Beaudoin, M. B. Manookin, and J. B. Demb
Distinct expressions of contrast gain control in parallel synaptic pathways converging on a retinal ganglion cell
J. Physiol., November 15, 2008; 586(22): 5487 - 5502.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
J. B. Demb
Functional circuitry of visual adaptation in the retina
J. Physiol., September 15, 2008; 586(18): 4377 - 4384.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
D. Kerschensteiner, H. Liu, C. W. Cheng, J. Demas, S. H. Cheng, C.-c. Hui, R. L. Chow, and R. O. L. Wong
Genetic Control of Circuit Function: Vsx1 and Irx5 Transcription Factors Regulate Contrast Adaptation in the Mouse Retina
J. Neurosci., March 5, 2008; 28(10): 2342 - 2352.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
M. Diaz-Quesada and M. Maravall
Intrinsic Mechanisms for Adaptive Gain Rescaling in Barrel Cortex
J. Neurosci., January 16, 2008; 28(3): 696 - 710.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
K. S. Gaudry and P. Reinagel
Contrast Adaptation in a Nonadapting LGN Model
J Neurophysiol, September 1, 2007; 98(3): 1287 - 1296.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
K. S. Gaudry and P. Reinagel
Benefits of Contrast Normalization Demonstrated in Neurons and Model Cells
J. Neurosci., July 25, 2007; 27(30): 8071 - 8079.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
K. A. Zaghloul, M. B. Manookin, B. G. Borghuis, K. Boahen, and J. B. Demb
Functional Circuitry for Peripheral Suppression in Mammalian Y-Type Retinal Ganglion Cells
J Neurophysiol, June 1, 2007; 97(6): 4327 - 4340.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
A. Kohn
Visual Adaptation: Physiology, Mechanisms, and Functional Benefits
J Neurophysiol, May 1, 2007; 97(5): 3155 - 3164.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
T. Ichinose and P. D. Lukasiewicz
Ambient Light Regulates Sodium Channel Activity to Dynamically Control Retinal Signaling
J. Neurosci., April 25, 2007; 27(17): 4756 - 4764.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
D. L. Beaudoin, B. G. Borghuis, and J. B. Demb
Cellular Basis for Contrast Gain Control over the Receptive Field Center of Mammalian Retinal Ganglion Cells
J. Neurosci., March 7, 2007; 27(10): 2636 - 2645.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
A. L. Fairhall, C. A. Burlingame, R. Narasimhan, R. A. Harris, J. L. Puchalla, and M. J. Berry II
Selectivity for Multiple Stimulus Features in Retinal Ganglion Cells
J Neurophysiol, November 1, 2006; 96(5): 2724 - 2738.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
M. Carandini, J. B. Demb, V. Mante, D. J. Tolhurst, Y. Dan, B. A. Olshausen, J. L. Gallant, and N. C. Rust
Do We Know What the Early Visual System Does?
J. Neurosci., November 16, 2005; 25(46): 10577 - 10597.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
K. A. Zaghloul, K. Boahen, and J. B. Demb
Contrast Adaptation in Subthreshold and Spiking Responses of Mammalian Y-Type Retinal Ganglion Cells
J. Neurosci., January 26, 2005; 25(4): 860 - 868.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
D. E. Kourennyi, X.-d. Liu, J. Hart, F. Mahmud, W. H. Baldridge, and S. Barnes
Reciprocal Modulation of Calcium Dynamics at Rod and Cone Photoreceptor Synapses by Nitric Oxide
J Neurophysiol, July 1, 2004; 92(1): 477 - 483.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
X.-J. Wang, Y. Liu, M. V. Sanchez-Vives, and D. A. McCormick
Adaptation and Temporal Decorrelation by Single Neurons in the Primary Visual Cortex
J Neurophysiol, June 1, 2003; 89(6): 3279 - 3293.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
K. A. Zaghloul, K. Boahen, and J. B. Demb
Different Circuits for ON and OFF Retinal Ganglion Cells Cause Different Contrast Sensitivities
J. Neurosci., April 1, 2003; 23(7): 2645 - 2654.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
K. J. Kim and F. Rieke
Slow Na+ Inactivation and Variance Adaptation in Salamander Retinal Ganglion Cells
J. Neurosci., February 15, 2003; 23(4): 1506 - 1516.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
K. Berglund, M. Midorikawa, and M. Tachibana
Increase in the Pool Size of Releasable Synaptic Vesicles by the Activation of Protein Kinase C in Goldfish Retinal Bipolar Cells
J. Neurosci., June 15, 2002; 22(12): 4776 - 4785.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
This Article Abstract 
Full Text (PDF) Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager 
Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (52) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Rieke, F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Rieke, F.
|
|
|
|
 |
|