HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 93/3/1476    most recent 00597.2004v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI 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 ISI Web of Science (10) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Trexler, E. B. Articles by Massey, S. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Trexler, E. B. Articles by Massey, S. C.

Simultaneous Contribution of Two Rod Pathways to AII Amacrine and Cone Bipolar Cell Light Responses

Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, University of Texas Medical School, Houston, Texas

Submitted 10 June 2004; accepted in final form 28 October 2004

Rod signals traverse several synapses en route to cone bipolar cells. In one pathway, rods communicate directly with cones via gap junctions. In a second pathway, signals flow rods-rod bipolars-AII amacrines-cone bipolars. The relative contribution of each pathway to retinal function is not well understood. Here we have examined this question from the perspective of the AII amacrine. AIIs form bidirectional electrical synapses with ON cone bipolars. Consequently, as ON cone bipolars are activated by outer plexiform inputs, they too should contribute to the AII response. Rod bipolar inputs to AIIs were blocked by AMPA receptor antagonists, revealing a smaller, non-AMPA component of the light response. This small residual response did not reverse between –70 and +70 mV and was blocked by carbenoxolone, suggesting that the current arose in ON cone bipolars and was transmitted to AIIs via gap junctions. The residual component was evident for stimuli 2 log units below cone threshold and was prolonged for bright stimuli, demonstrating that it was rod driven. Because the rod bipolar-AII pathway was blocked, the rod-driven residual current likely was generated via the rod-cone pathway activation of ON cone bipolars. Thus for a large range of intensities, rod signals reach the inner retina by both rod bipolar-AII and rod-cone coupling pathways.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. B. Manookin, D. L. Beaudoin, Z. R. Ernst, L. J. Flagel, and J. B. Demb Disinhibition Combines with Excitation to Extend the Operating Range of the OFF Visual Pathway in Daylight J. Neurosci., April 16, 2008; 28(16): 4136 - 4150. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. D. Eggers, M. A. McCall, and P. D. Lukasiewicz Presynaptic inhibition differentially shapes transmission in distinct circuits in the mouse retina J. Physiol., July 15, 2007; 582(2): 569 - 582. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.-J. Pang, M. M. Abd-El-Barr, F. Gao, D. E. Bramblett, D. L. Paul, and S. M. Wu Relative contributions of rod and cone bipolar cell inputs to AII amacrine cell light responses in the mouse retina J. Physiol., April 15, 2007; 580(2): 397 - 410. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Z.-Y. Zhou, Q.-F. Wan, P. Thakur, and R. Heidelberger Capacitance Measurements in the Mouse Rod Bipolar Cell Identify a Pool of Releasable Synaptic Vesicles J Neurophysiol, November 1, 2006; 96(5): 2539 - 2548. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]