Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Articles, Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive

Enhancement of Vision by Monocular Deprivation in Adult Mice

Glen T. Prusky, Nazia M. Alam and Robert M. Douglas
Journal of Neuroscience 8 November 2006, 26 (45) 11554-11561; https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3396-06.2006
Glen T. Prusky
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nazia M. Alam
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert M. Douglas
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Effect of 5 d MD (shading) on OKR sensitivity. A, Spatial frequency sensitivity through nondeprived eyes (open; top trace) was increased and reached a maximum over 3–4 d of MD. Opening the deprived eye initiated a gradual decline to baseline over 5–6 d. Deprived eye responses (closed; bottom trace) were not affected after the first day. B, Effect of MD on contrast sensitivity was similar: Sensitivity increased from baseline (open squares) over 5 d of MD (day 5 plotted with closed circles) and returned to baseline levels over 10 d (open diamonds; plotted is the 10th day after MD). C, There was little effect of MD on contrast sensitivity through the deprived eye (pre-deprivation baseline, open squares; immediately after day 5 of MD, closed circles; 10 d after MD, open diamonds). ±SEM plotted with vertical scale lines are present but are often occluded by data symbols in this and other figures.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Selective visual field responses in schematic illustration. The length of arching arrows represent the segment of the visual field in which the grating was present during testing (binocular field, Binocular; monocular field, Monocular), and the associated numbers represent spatial frequency thresholds in c/d (see Materials and Methods for details). A, In experimentally naive mice, full-field (outside arrow; dotted segment represents the region of the field not visible to the eyes) stimulation generated a threshold of 0.39 c/d. Limiting the stimulus to the binocular field resulted in the same threshold as full-field stimulation (0.39 c/d); monocular-field responses (0.34 c/d) were lower regardless of the size of the stimulus within the field. Combining monocular and binocular stimulation resulted in the same threshold (0.39 c/d) as binocular alone or full-field stimulation. B, Full-field stimulation in enhanced mice resulted in a threshold of 0.55 c/d. Monocular field stimulation alone or combined with binocular resulted in about the same threshold (0.54 c/d), whereas binocular responses alone did not differ (0.39 c/d) from those in naive animals (A).

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Experiential control of enhanced spatial frequency sensitivity. For comparison, the dashed trace is nondeprived eye profile from Figure 1A. A, Sensitivity measured through the nondeprived eye (top trace), but not tested during 5 d MD (shading; closed circles), did not reach maximal enhancement, and sensitivity dropped to baseline immediately on eye opening. Deprived eye responses (bottom trace) were affected little by MD. B, Ten-day MD without testing produced comparable results. C, Animals tested twice daily during a 5 d MD presented a similar profile of enhancement as that in animals tested only once daily (dotted trace), but the rate of enhancement in sensitivity during MD was slightly slower, as was the rate of decay in sensitivity after MD. D, BD for 5 d had little effect on thresholds measured through either eye. E, The intact eye (top trace) after monocular enucleation (bottom trace) was enhanced by 10% after 1 d, and remained at that level thereafter. Occlusion of the eye for 5 d (shading) had no effect on the threshold.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    Effect of visual cortex manipulations on enhancement induced by 5 d MD. A, Bilateral aspiration of visual cortex. Left panel, Schematic representation of deprived (shaded box) and nondeprived eyes combined with superimposed drawings of the brains showing the location of lesions. Right panel, For comparison, the dashed trace is nondeprived eye profile from Figure 1A. The spatial frequency threshold through the nondeprived eye of animals with bilateral V1 lesions (top trace) became slightly elevated (∼10%) during the MD (gray box) and dropped to baseline immediately on eye opening. Sensitivity through the deprived eye (bottom trace) was not affected by the treatment. B, C, Unilateral inactivation of visual cortex. Period during that muscimol-releasing Elvax was present is indicated in black; period of MD is indicated in gray. Sensitivity measured before surgery was stable at normal baseline levels, and muscimol-releasing Elvax did not affect sensitivity through either eye before MD. B, Inactivating visual cortex ipsilateral to the deprived eye blocked the characteristic enhancement of sensitivity (closed circles). The effect of silencing was reversible, however, because MD after removal of the muscimol-impregnated Elvax resulted in characteristic enhancement. Elvax implants without muscimol presented a profile of enhancement characteristic of that in nontreated animals (indicated by dotted line in both panels). C, Inactivation of visual cortex contralateral to the deprived eye, and controls. MD induced an enhancement of OKRs characteristic of that in animals with control Elvax; however, sensitivity dropped to baseline as soon as the deprived eye was opened. Removal of the muscimol-impregnated Elvax enabled a subsequent MD to enhance sensitivity in a characteristic manner. Deprived eye responses (bottom traces) were not affected by MD in either experiment.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Effect on spatial frequency sensitivity of varying the duration of MD (indicated by shading). A, Three day MD resulted in enhancement through nondeprived eye (top trace) only during the deprivation. B, Five day MD resulted in enhanced responses that decremented gradually after MD; replication of experiment in Figure 1A. C, Ten day MD both extended the duration of enhanced responses after MD, and enabled enhanced sensitivity to persist at maximum. None of the above manipulations affected deprived eye responses (A–C, bottom traces). D, Detailed comparison of 3 d (open triangles), 5 d (closed circles), twice daily testing for 5 d (Fig. 3C, open circles) and 10 d (open squares) profiles after MD.

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    Effect on spatial frequency sensitivity of repeating MD (shading). Traces in A–C are a continuation of those in Figure 5, A–C (represented with dotted lines). A, Repeating a 3 d period of MD resulted in a profile of enhancement through nondeprived eyes similar to that after the first MD. B, A second 5 d MD resulted in an immediate maximal enhancement that was maintained at maximal values and remained above baseline far longer than after the first MD. C, A second 10 d MD resulted in a profile similar to B, but enhanced responses were maintained even longer. Repeated MD did not affect deprived eye responses (A–C, bottom traces). D, Comparison of second 3, 5, and 10 d MD profiles after MD, in detail. E, Comparison of profiles after first (1) (Fig. 5C) second (2) (C), and third (3) periods of 10 d MD reveals increasing duration of enhancement. F, Two, 5 d periods of MD (2×5d; B) resulted in longer duration enhancement after MD than that after a single 10 d MD (10d) (Fig. 5C).

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Summary of major results with descriptive and inferential statistics

    GroupNBaselineMaximum%DaysFdfFigures
    No change
            5 d binocular deprivation50.388 ± 0.00090.386 ± 0.0018001.144, 63D
            5 d MD + ipsilateral muscimol50.392 ± 0.00040.390 ± 0.00120015, 314B
    Small enhancement (∼10%)
            Enucleation40.393 ± 0.00050.434 ± 0.001710NA1153, 153E
            5 d MD + bilateral lesions60.388 ± 0.00210.430 ± 0.00091101305, 144A
    Intermediate enhancement (∼28%); no persistence
            5 d MD + without testing60.387 ± 0.00210.497 ± 0.000029020174, 73A
            10 d MD + without testing60.388 ± 0.00150.495 ± 0.000628044695, 73B
    Maximal enhancement (∼37%); no persistence
            3 d MD (first)50.389 ± 0.00090.530 ± 0.0007360147695, 105A, 5D
            3 d MD (second)50.388 ± 0.00090.527 ± 0.001536048414, 106A, 6D
            5 d MD + contralateral muscimol60.385 ± 0.00060.531 ± 0.001837021855, 314C
    Maximal enhancement (∼37%); with short persistence
            5 d MD (first)50.395 ± 0.00140.5372 ± 0.000736510184, 191
            5 d MD (first)70.396 ± 0.00120.5463 ± 0.00213866076, 211, 5B, 5D
            5 d MD (ipsilateral Elvax control)30.387 ± 0.00300.5310 ± 0.00153769682, 154B
            5 d MD (contralateral Elvax control)20.387 ± 0.00230.5268 ± 0.001136669071, 154C
            5 d MD (after ipsilateral muscimol)50.390 ± 0.00060.5128 ± 0.001631711174, 164B
            5 d MD (after contralateral muscimol)60.392 ± 0.00050.5345 ± 0.001536712155, 164C
    Maximal enhancement (∼37%); with extended persistence
            5 d MD + ×2 testing50.389 ± 0.00130.535 ± 0.001237815894, 253C, 5D
            10 d MD (first)50.385 ± 0.00370.530 ± 0.0016381117644, 305C, 5D, 6E, 6F
            5 d MD (second)70.396 ± 0.00210.547 ± 0.0021383115416, 306B, 6D, 6F
            10 d MD (second)50.389 ± 0.00090.538 ± 0.0007383666394, 356C, 6D, 6E
            5 d MD (second after 6 months)50.397 ± 0.00160.548 ± 0.0026386614024, 31NA
            10 d MD (third)30.389 ± 0.00240.532 ± 0.000737853462, 396E
    • Groups are listed (left column) and arranged (subheadings) according to experimental effects. The number of animals in a group (N), the baseline spatial frequency sensitivity with SEM (Baseline), the maximum sensitivity over the course of the experiment with SEM (Maximum), the percentage change between baseline and maximum sensitivity (%), the number of days enhanced sensitivity persists above baseline after MD (Days), F values of repeated-measures ANOVAs for the group (F), degrees of freedom of the analysis (df), and references to figure number and panel of the experiment (Figures) are listed for each group in columns.

Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 26 (45)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 26, Issue 45
8 Nov 2006
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Enhancement of Vision by Monocular Deprivation in Adult Mice
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Enhancement of Vision by Monocular Deprivation in Adult Mice
Glen T. Prusky, Nazia M. Alam, Robert M. Douglas
Journal of Neuroscience 8 November 2006, 26 (45) 11554-11561; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3396-06.2006

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
Enhancement of Vision by Monocular Deprivation in Adult Mice
Glen T. Prusky, Nazia M. Alam, Robert M. Douglas
Journal of Neuroscience 8 November 2006, 26 (45) 11554-11561; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3396-06.2006
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Articles

  • Memory Retrieval Has a Dynamic Influence on the Maintenance Mechanisms That Are Sensitive to ζ-Inhibitory Peptide (ZIP)
  • Neurophysiological Evidence for a Cortical Contribution to the Wakefulness-Related Drive to Breathe Explaining Hypocapnia-Resistant Ventilation in Humans
  • Monomeric Alpha-Synuclein Exerts a Physiological Role on Brain ATP Synthase
Show more Articles

Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive

  • Influence of Reward on Corticospinal Excitability during Movement Preparation
  • Identification and Characterization of a Sleep-Active Cell Group in the Rostral Medullary Brainstem
  • Gravin Orchestrates Protein Kinase A and β2-Adrenergic Receptor Signaling Critical for Synaptic Plasticity and Memory
Show more Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Accessibility
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2025 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.