The topographical distribution of rods and cones in the adult chicken retina

doi:10.1016/0014-4835(73)90244-3

Experimental Eye Research

Volume 17, Issue 4, 25 November 1973, Pages 347-355

https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-4835(73)90244-3 Get rights and content

Abstract

The relative proportion of rods and cones (single and double) in the chicken retina was determined by counting these elements in each of nine pre-determined segments prepared as periodic acid-Schiff serial sections for rod (hyperboloid glycogen) and double cone (accessory cone paraboloid glycogen) identifications and as unfixed, flat preparations for cone determinations (colored oil droplets). Periodic acid-Schiff preparations revealed that rods and accessory cones were equal in number in all retinal segments except those located directly posterior to the posterior extremity of the pecten where the double cones out-numbered the rods in a ratio of 14 : 10. On the basis of oil-droplet pigmentation, double cones housing a golden-yellow droplet in their chief component and a small yellowish-green droplet in their accessory members were constantly observed to be twice as numerous as single cones (red droplet) in all retinal segments. These data reveal that the proportion of rods to double and single cones is 2 : 2 : 1, respectively, in all areas of the chicken retina except a posterior (lateral) segment where the ratio is 10 : 14 : 7. This area of greater cone concentration corresponds to the site of the temporal fovea of some birds and may represent the area of most acute vision in the fovea-free chicken retina.

References (38)

A. Blässer
Zool. Jahrb. (Zool. Physiol.)
(1927)
A.F. Bliss
J. Gen. Physiol.
(1946)
H.M. Carleton et al.
J.H. Chievitz
Arch. Anat. Physiol. Physiol. Abt.
(1891)
T.G. Cooper et al.
Exp. Eye Res.
(1968)
A.J. Coulombre
Amer. J. Anat.
(1955)
W. Dobrowolsky
Arch. Anat. Physiol. Wissen. Med.
(1871)
G. Düker
Z. Tierpsychol.
(1963)
H. Erhard
Zool. Jahrb. (Zool. Physiol.)
(1924)
N. Feder et al.
J. Biophys. Biochem. Cytol.
(1958)

E. Hahn

Z. Wiss. Zool. Abt. A

(1916)

S. Hecht

Ann. Rev. Biochem.

(1942)

C. Hess

Arch. Augenheilk.

(1907)

P.E. King-Smith

W. Krause

Intern. Monat. Anat. Physiol.

(1894)

T. Matsusaka

Jap. J. Ophthalmol.

(1963)

I. Mayr

Vision Res.

(1972)

D.B. Meyer

Stain Technol.

(1960)

D.B. Meyer et al.

Amer. J. Anat.

(1966)

Cited by (82)

The retinal basis of vision in chicken
2020, Seminars in Cell and Developmental Biology
The Avian retina is far less known than that of mammals such as mouse and macaque, and detailed study is overdue. The chicken (Gallus gallus) has potential as a model, in part because research can build on developmental studies of the eye and nervous system. One can expect differences between bird and mammal retinas simply because whereas most mammals have three types of visual photoreceptor birds normally have six. Spectral pathways and colour vision are of particular interest, because filtering by oil droplets narrows cone spectral sensitivities and birds are probably tetrachromatic. The number of receptor inputs is reflected in the retinal circuitry. The chicken probably has four types of horizontal cell, there are at least 11 types of bipolar cell, often with bi- or tri-stratified axon terminals, and there is a high density of ganglion cells, which make complex connections in the inner plexiform layer. In addition, there is likely to be retinal specialisation, for example chicken photoreceptors and ganglion cells have separate peaks of cell density in the central and dorsal retina, which probably serve different types of behaviour.
The chick eye in vision research: An excellent model for the study of ocular disease
2017, Progress in Retinal and Eye Research
Citation Excerpt :
Both chicken and human retinas are cone-rich, highlighting the importance of color vision in both species. In chickens this is manifested in a 3:2 cone to rod ratio overall (Meyer and May 1973), while the human retina exhibits a 1:20 ratio of cones to rods (Curcio et al., 1990). Cone density varies within both chicken and human retinas.
The domestic chicken, Gallus gallus, serves as an excellent model for the study of a wide range of ocular diseases and conditions. The purpose of this manuscript is to outline some anatomic, physiologic, and genetic features of this organism as a robust animal model for vision research, particularly for modeling human retinal disease. Advantages include a sequenced genome, a large eye, relative ease of handling and maintenance, and ready availability. Relevant similarities and differences to humans are highlighted for ocular structures as well as for general physiologic processes. Current research applications for various ocular diseases and conditions, including ocular imaging with spectral domain optical coherence tomography, are discussed. Several genetic and non-genetic ocular disease models are outlined, including for pathologic myopia, keratoconus, glaucoma, retinal detachment, retinal degeneration, ocular albinism, and ocular tumors. Finally, the use of stem cell technology to study the repair of damaged tissues in the chick eye is discussed. Overall, the chick model provides opportunities for high-throughput translational studies to more effectively prevent or treat blinding ocular diseases.
Mechanisms of Photoreceptor Patterning in Vertebrates and Invertebrates
2016, Trends in Genetics
Citation Excerpt :
The four single cone types in the chicken retina are sensitive to red, green, blue, and violet wavelengths of light (expressing LWS, Rh2, SWS2, and SWS1 opsins respectively) (Figure 1C2) [40,41]. These cone types have been identified chiefly by differently colored oil droplets located between the inner and outer segments, which may act as a filter for specific wavelengths of light, as well as focusing photons onto the outer segment [42–45] (Figure 1C2). Two morphologically different sets of double cones in chickens are sensitive to long wavelengths of light [46].
Across the animal kingdom, visual systems have evolved to be uniquely suited to the environments and behavioral patterns of different species. Visual acuity and color perception depend on the distribution of photoreceptor (PR) subtypes within the retina. Retinal mosaics can be organized into three broad categories: stochastic/regionalized, regionalized, and ordered. We describe here the retinal mosaics of flies, zebrafish, chickens, mice, and humans, and the gene regulatory networks controlling proper PR specification in each. By drawing parallels in eye development between these divergent species, we identify a set of conserved organizing principles and transcriptional networks that govern PR subtype differentiation.
Compensation to positive as well as negative lenses can occur in chicks reared in bright UV lighting
2012, Vision Research
An earlier report describing a lack of compensation to imposed myopic and hyperopic defocus in chicks reared in UV lighting has led to the belief that the spatial resolving power of the UV cone photoreceptor network in chicks is not capable of decoding optical defocus. However this study used dim light rearing conditions, of less than 10 lx. The purpose of the current study was to determine if emmetropization is possible in young chicks reared under higher luminance, UV lighting conditions. Young, 4 day-old chicks were reared under diurnal near UV (390 nm) illumination set to either 20 or 200 lx while wearing a monocular defocusing lens (+20, +10, −10 or −20 D), for 7 days. Similarly treated control groups were reared under diurnal white lighting (WL) of matching illuminance. The WL and UV LED sources were set to equivalent illuminances, measured in “chick lux”, calculated from radiometer readings taken through appropriate narrow band interference filters, and a mathematical model of the spectral sensitivity of the chick visual system. High resolution A-scan ultrasonography was undertaken on days 0 (before lenses were fitted), 2, 4, and 7 to track ocular dimensions and refractive errors were measured by retinoscopy on days 0 and 7. Compensation to negative lenses was unaffected by UV illuminance levels, with near full compensation being achieved under both conditions, as well as under both WL conditions. In contrast, compensation to the positive lenses was markedly impaired in 20 lx UV lighting, with increased instead of decreased axial elongation along with a myopic refractive shift being recorded with the +10 D lens. Compensation under both WL conditions was again near normal for the +10 D lens. However, with the +20 D lens, myopic shifts in refractive error were observed under both dim UV and WL conditions. The spatial resolving power of the UV cone photoreceptor network in the chick is sufficient to detect optical defocus and guide the emmetropization response, provided illumination is sufficiently high. However, compensation to imposed myopic defocus may be compromised, when either the amount of defocus is very high or illumination low, especially when the wavelength is restricted to the UV range.
Effect of light intensity on broiler behaviour and diurnal rhythms
2012, Applied Animal Behaviour Science
Citation Excerpt :
Preference for bright light by poultry species is compatible with the bird's eye structure. The retina of the avian eye contains extensive single and double cones, responsible for vision during bright light conditions (Meyer and May, 1973). The presence of four different types of retinal cones containing specific oil droplets is responsible for extending the spectral sensitivity to the ultra violet-A (UV-A) portion of the spectrum (Govardovskii and Zueva, 1977; Hart et al., 1999).
Light intensity manipulation is an important management tool affecting broiler behaviour and physiology but still there is a debate regarding the optimum level to be used in confinement barns. Two experiments were completed to study the impact of light intensity (1, 10, 20 and 40 lx) on behaviour and diurnal rhythms of broilers raised to 35 d of age. For each experiment, 950 Ross × Ross 308 chicks were housed per room with replication of individual light intensity treatment in two environmentally controlled rooms. Within each large room, a small pen with 25 male and 25 female chicks was used for recording behaviour. Data were analyzed as a randomized complete block design with experiment acting as a block. All chicks were provided with 40 lx intensity and 23 h light until shifting to treatment light intensity and 17 h daylength at 7 d of age. For each replicate, behaviour was recorded for a 24 h period, starting at 16 or 17 d of age. At 23 d of age, three birds per room were bled at the start, middle and end of light and dark periods for melatonin estimation using RIA. When summarized over the 24 and 17 h observation periods, birds exposed to a light intensity of 1 lx rested more (P = 0.01) and preened (P < 0.05) and foraged (P < 0.05) less in comparison to other light intensities. Birds from all treatments exhibited diurnal rhythms for feeding, resting, drinking, walking, standing, foraging and preening behaviours with little or no activity during the 7 h dark phase. The serum melatonin levels at the start, middle and end of light and dark phases were unaffected by light intensity (P > 0.1). In conclusion, light intensity ranges from 1 to 40 lx did not affect melatonin levels or behavioural diurnal rhythms, but birds exposed to a light intensity of 1 lx rested more and preened less, potentially indicating a reduced welfare state.
Behavioural assessment of flicker fusion frequency in chicken Gallus gallus domesticus
2011, Vision Research
Citation Excerpt :
The wild ancestor of the domestic chicken, the red jungle fowl, is a diurnal and crepuscular, ground-dwelling bird in tropical and sub-tropical forest in south-east Asia (Collias & Collias, 1967), where the photic environment is dominated by a green canopy of vegetation with varying patches of shade light (Bowmaker & Knowles, 1977). Chickens also have a greater proportion of rods in their retinas compared to some other birds (Meyer, 1977; Meyer & May, 1973), so it may be expected that CFF will be relatively low in this species compared to faster-flying birds that are active in bright light conditions (Evans, Cuthill, & Bennett, 2006). Comparisons of CFF in relation to rod: cone ratios between different avian species or ecotypes are difficult because data on both CFF and retinal organization in birds is so sparse.
To interact with its visual environment, an organism needs to perceive objects in both space and time. High temporal resolution is hence important to the fitness of diurnally active animals, not least highly active aerial species such as birds. However, temporal resolution, as assessed by flicker fusion frequency (FFF; the stimulus frequency at which a flickering light stimulus can no longer be resolved and appears continuous) or critical flicker fusion frequency (CFF; the highest flicker fusion frequency at any light intensity) has rarely been assessed in birds. In order to further our understanding of temporal resolution as a function of light intensity in birds we used behavioural experiments with domestic chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus) from an old game breed ‘Gammalsvensk dvärghöna’ (which is morphologically and behaviourally similar to the wildtype ancestor, the red jungle fowl, G. gallus), to generate an ‘Intensity/FFF curve’ (I/FFF curve) across full spectrum light intensities ranging from 0.2 to 2812 cd m⁻². The I/FFF curve is double-branched, resembling that of other chordates with a duplex retina of both rods and cones. Assuming that the branches represent rod and cone mediated responses respectively, the break point between them places the transition between scotopic and photopic vision at between 0.8 and 1.9 cd m⁻². Average FFF ranged from 19.8 Hz at the lowest light intensity to a CFF 87.0 Hz at 1375 cd m⁻². FFF dropped slightly at the highest light intensity. There was some individual variation with certain birds displaying CFFs of 90–100 Hz. The FFF values demonstrated by this non-selected breed appear to be considerably higher than other behaviourally derived FFF values for similar stimuli reported for white and brown commercial laying hens, indicating that the domestication process might have influenced temporal resolution in chicken.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

The topographical distribution of rods and cones in the adult chicken retina

Abstract

Zool. Jahrb. (Zool. Physiol.)

J. Gen. Physiol.

Arch. Anat. Physiol. Physiol. Abt.

Exp. Eye Res.

Amer. J. Anat.

Arch. Anat. Physiol. Wissen. Med.

Z. Tierpsychol.

Zool. Jahrb. (Zool. Physiol.)

J. Biophys. Biochem. Cytol.

Z. Wiss. Zool. Abt. A

Ann. Rev. Biochem.

Arch. Augenheilk.

Intern. Monat. Anat. Physiol.

Jap. J. Ophthalmol.

Vision Res.

Stain Technol.

Amer. J. Anat.