A simple retinal mechanism contributes to perceptual interactions between rod- and cone-mediated responses in primates

  1. William N Grimes
  2. Logan R Graves
  3. Mathew T Summers
  4. Fred Rieke  Is a corresponding author
  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Washington, United States

Abstract

Visual perception across a broad range of light levels is shaped by interactions between rod- and cone-mediated signals. Because responses of retinal ganglion cells, the output cells of the retina, depend on signals from both rod and cone photoreceptors, interactions occurring in retinal circuits provide an opportunity to link the mechanistic operation of parallel pathways and perception. Here we show that rod- and cone-mediated responses interact nonlinearly to control the responses of primate retinal ganglion cells; these nonlinear interactions, surprisingly, were asymmetric, with rod responses strongly suppressing subsequent cone responses but not vice-versa. Human psychophysical experiments revealed a similar perceptual asymmetry. Nonlinear interactions in the retinal output cells were well-predicted by linear summation of kinetically-distinct rod- and cone-mediated signals followed by a synaptic nonlinearity. These experiments thus reveal how a simple mechanism controlling interactions between parallel pathways shapes circuit outputs and perception.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. William N Grimes

    Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Logan R Graves

    Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Mathew T Summers

    Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Fred Rieke

    Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    For correspondence
    rieke@u.washington.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Ronald L Calabrese, Emory University, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: We obtained primate retinas (Macaca fascicularis, Macaca nemestrina and Macaca mulatta of either sex, ages 3-19 years) through the Tissue Distribution Program of the Regional Primate Research Center. All protocols were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at the University of Washington (protocol 4140-01).

Human subjects: The experimental protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Washington (protocol 16934) and was in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. All subjects gave informed consent in writing before participating in the experiment.

Version history

  1. Received: April 10, 2015
  2. Accepted: June 21, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: June 22, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 8, 2015 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Grimes et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,224
    views
  • 352
    downloads
  • 18
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. William N Grimes
  2. Logan R Graves
  3. Mathew T Summers
  4. Fred Rieke
(2015)
A simple retinal mechanism contributes to perceptual interactions between rod- and cone-mediated responses in primates
eLife 4:e08033.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.08033

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.08033

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Ya-Hui Lin, Li-Wen Wang ... Li-An Chu
    Research Article

    Tissue-clearing and labeling techniques have revolutionized brain-wide imaging and analysis, yet their application to clinical formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) blocks remains challenging. We introduce HIF-Clear, a novel method for efficiently clearing and labeling centimeter-thick FFPE specimens using elevated temperature and concentrated detergents. HIF-Clear with multi-round immunolabeling reveals neuron circuitry regulating multiple neurotransmitter systems in a whole FFPE mouse brain and is able to be used as the evaluation of disease treatment efficiency. HIF-Clear also supports expansion microscopy and can be performed on a non-sectioned 15-year-old FFPE specimen, as well as a 3-month formalin-fixed mouse brain. Thus, HIF-Clear represents a feasible approach for researching archived FFPE specimens for future neuroscientific and 3D neuropathological analyses.

    1. Neuroscience
    Amanda Chu, Nicholas T Gordon ... Michael A McDannald
    Research Article

    Pavlovian fear conditioning has been extensively used to study the behavioral and neural basis of defensive systems. In a typical procedure, a cue is paired with foot shock, and subsequent cue presentation elicits freezing, a behavior theoretically linked to predator detection. Studies have since shown a fear conditioned cue can elicit locomotion, a behavior that - in addition to jumping, and rearing - is theoretically linked to imminent or occurring predation. A criticism of studies observing fear conditioned cue-elicited locomotion is that responding is non-associative. We gave rats Pavlovian fear discrimination over a baseline of reward seeking. TTL-triggered cameras captured 5 behavior frames/s around cue presentation. Experiment 1 examined the emergence of danger-specific behaviors over fear acquisition. Experiment 2 examined the expression of danger-specific behaviors in fear extinction. In total, we scored 112,000 frames for nine discrete behavior categories. Temporal ethograms show that during acquisition, a fear conditioned cue suppresses reward seeking and elicits freezing, but also elicits locomotion, jumping, and rearing - all of which are maximal when foot shock is imminent. During extinction, a fear conditioned cue most prominently suppresses reward seeking, and elicits locomotion that is timed to shock delivery. The independent expression of these behaviors in both experiments reveal a fear conditioned cue to orchestrate a temporally organized suite of behaviors.