JN Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol 82: 1676-1688, 1999;
0022-3077/99 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Burkhardt, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Fahey, P. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Burkhardt, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Fahey, P. K.

The Journal of Neurophysiology Vol. 82 No. 4 October 1999, pp. 1676-1688
Copyright ©1999 by the American Physiological Society

Contrast Rectification and Distributed Encoding By ON-OFF Amacrine Cells in the Retina

Dwight A. Burkhardt1,2 and Patrick K. Fahey2

Departments of  1Psychology and  2Physiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455

Burkhardt, Dwight A. and Patrick K. Fahey. Contrast Rectification and Distributed Encoding By ON-OFF Amacrine Cells in the Retina. J. Neurophysiol. 82: 1676-1688, 1999. The encoding of luminance contrast by ON-OFF amacrine cells was investigated by intracellular recording in the retina of the tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum). Contrast flashes of positive and negative polarity were applied at the center of the receptive field while the entire retina was light adapted to a background field of 20 cd/m2. Many amacrine cells showed remarkably high contrast gain: Up to 20-35% of the maximum response was evoked by a contrast step of only 1%. In the larger signal domain, C50, the contrast required to evoke a response 50% of the maximum, was often remarkably low: 24 of 25 cells had a C50 value of <= 10% for at least one contrast polarity. Across cells and contrast polarity, the dynamic ranges varied from extremely narrow to broad, thereby blanketing the range of reflectances associated with objects in natural environments. Although some cells resembled "contrast rectifiers," by showing similar responses to contrasts of opposite polarity, many did not. Thus for contrast gain and C50, individual cells could show a strong preference for either negative or positive contrast. In the time domain, the preference was strong and unidirectional: for equal contrast steps, the latency of the response to negative contrast was 20-45 ms shorter than that for positive contrast. The present results, when compared with those for bipolar cells, suggest that, on average, amacrine cells add some amplification, particularly for negative contrast, to the high contrast gain already established by bipolar cells. In the time domain, our data reveal a striking transformation from bipolar to amacrine cells in favor of negative contrast. These and further observations have implications for the input and output of amacrine cell circuits. The present finding of substantial differences between cells reveals a potential substrate for distributed encoding of luminance contrast within the ON-OFF amacrine cell population.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
R. F. Miller, N. P. Staff, and T. J. Velte
Form and Function of ON-OFF Amacrine Cells in the Amphibian Retina
J Neurophysiol, May 1, 2006; 95(5): 3171 - 3190.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online