The collective activity pattern of retinal ganglion cells, the retinal code, underlies higher visual processing. How does the ambient illuminance of the visual scene influence this retinal output? We recorded from isolated mouse and pig retina and from mouse dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus in vivo at up to seven ambient light levels covering the scotopic to photopic regimes. Across each luminance transition, most ganglion cells exhibited qualitative response changes, whereas they maintained stable responses within each luminance. We commonly observed the appearance and disappearance of ON responses in OFF cells and vice versa. Such qualitative response changes occurred for a variety of stimuli, including full-field and localized contrast steps and naturalistic movies. Our results suggest that the retinal code is not fixed but varies with every change of ambient luminance. This finding raises questions about signal processing within the retina and has implications for visual processing in higher brain areas.
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $4.92 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
O'Brien, B.J., Isayama, T., Richardson, R. & Berson, D.M. Intrinsic physiological properties of cat retinal ganglion cells. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 538, 787–802 (2002).
Gollisch, T. & Meister, M. Eye smarter than scientists believed: neural computations in circuits of the retina. Neuron 65, 150–164 (2010).
Reitner, A., Sharpe, L.T. & Zrenner, E. Is colour vision possible with only rods and blue-sensitive cones? Nature 352, 798–800 (1991).
Enroth-Cugell, C. & Lennie, P. The control of retinal ganglion cell discharge by receptive field surrounds. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 247, 551–578 (1975).
Farrow, K. et al. Ambient illumination toggles a neuronal circuit switch in the retina and visual perception at cone threshold. Neuron 78, 325–338 (2013).
Sagdullaev, B.T. & McCall, M.A. Stimulus size and intensity alter fundamental receptive-field properties of mouse retinal ganglion cells in vivo. Vis. Neurosci. 22, 649–659 (2005).
Grimes, W.N., Schwartz, G.W. & Rieke, F. The synaptic and circuit mechanisms underlying a change in spatial encoding in the retina. Neuron 82, 460–473 (2014).
Umino, Y., Solessio, E. & Barlow, R.B. Speed, spatial, and temporal tuning of rod and cone vision in mouse. J. Neurosci. 28, 189–198 (2008).
Protti, D.A., Flores-Herr, N., Li, W., Massey, S.C. & Wassle, H. Light signaling in scotopic conditions in the rabbit, mouse and rat retina: a physiological and anatomical study. J. Neurophysiol. 93, 3479–3488 (2005).
Eggers, E.D., Mazade, R.E. & Klein, J.S. Inhibition to retinal rod bipolar cells is regulated by light levels. J. Neurophysiol. 110, 153–161 (2013).
Bloomfield, S.A. & Dacheux, R.F. Rod vision: pathways and processing in the mammalian retina. Prog. Retin. Eye Res. 20, 351–384 (2001).
Ke, J.B. et al. Adaptation to background light enables contrast coding at rod bipolar cell synapses. Neuron 81, 388–401 (2014).
Dunn, F.A., Doan, T., Sampath, A.P. & Rieke, F. Controlling the gain of rod-mediated signals in the mammalian retina. J. Neurosci. 26, 3959–3970 (2006).
Dunn, F.A., Lankheet, M.J. & Rieke, F. Light adaptation in cone vision involves switching between receptor and post-receptor sites. Nature 449, 603–606 (2007).
Allen, A.E. et al. Melanopsin-driven light adaptation in mouse vision. Curr. Biol. published online, doi:10.1016/j.cub.2014.09.015 (7 October 2014).
Manookin, M.B., Beaudoin, D.L., Ernst, Z.R., Flagel, L.J. & Demb, J.B. Disinhibition combines with excitation to extend the operating range of the OFF visual pathway in daylight. J. Neurosci. 28, 4136–4150 (2008).
Münch, T.A. et al. Approach sensitivity in the retina processed by a multifunctional neural circuit. Nat. Neurosci. 12, 1308–1316 (2009).
Pitkow, X. & Meister, M. Decorrelation and efficient coding by retinal ganglion cells. Nat. Neurosci. 15, 628–635 (2012).
Kuffler, S.W. Discharge patterns and functional organization of mammalian retina. J. Neurophysiol. 16, 37–68 (1953).
Farajian, R., Pan, F., Akopian, A., Volgyi, B. & Bloomfield, S.A. Masked excitatory crosstalk between the ON and OFF visual pathways in the mammalian retina. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 589, 4473–4489 (2011).
Roska, B. & Werblin, F. Vertical interactions across ten parallel, stacked representations in the mammalian retina. Nature 410, 583–587 (2001).
Meister, M. & Berry, M.J. II. The neural code of the retina. Neuron 22, 435–450 (1999).
Lamb, T.D. & Pugh, E.N. Jr. Phototransduction, dark adaptation, and rhodopsin regeneration: the Proctor lecture. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 47, 5137–5152 (2006).
Werblin, F.S. & Dowling, J.E. Organization of the retina of the mudpuppy, Necturus maculosus. II. Intracellular recording. J. Neurophysiol. 32, 339–355 (1969).
Asari, H. & Meister, M. The projective field of retinal bipolar cells and its modulation by visual context. Neuron 81, 641–652 (2014).
Lukasiewicz, P.D. Synaptic mechanisms that shape visual signaling at the inner retina. Prog. Brain Res. 147, 205–218 (2005).
Thoreson, W.B. & Mangel, S.C. Lateral interactions in the outer retina. Prog. Retin. Eye Res. 31, 407–441 (2012).
Baccus, S.A. & Meister, M. Fast and slow contrast adaptation in retinal circuitry. Neuron 36, 909–919 (2002).
Smirnakis, S.M., Berry, M.J., Warland, D.K., Bialek, W. & Meister, M. Adaptation of retinal processing to image contrast and spatial scale. Nature 386, 69–73 (1997).
Tkačik, G., Ghosh, A., Schneidman, E. & Segev, R. Adaptation to changes in higher-order stimulus statistics in the salamander retina. PLoS ONE 9, e85841 (2014).
Helmstaedter, M. et al. Connectomic reconstruction of the inner plexiform layer in the mouse retina. Nature 500, 168–174 (2013).
Lauritzen, J.S. et al. ON cone bipolar cell axonal synapses in the OFF inner plexiform layer of the rabbit retina. J. Comp. Neurol. 521, 977–1000 (2013).
Geffen, M.N., de Vries, S.E. & Meister, M. Retinal ganglion cells can rapidly change polarity from Off to On. PLoS Biol. 5, e65 (2007).
Farrow, K. & Masland, R.H. Physiological clustering of visual channels in the mouse retina. J. Neurophysiol. 105, 1516–1530 (2011).
Rockhill, R.L., Daly, F.J., MacNeil, M.A., Brown, S.P. & Masland, R.H. The diversity of ganglion cells in a mammalian retina. J. Neurosci. 22, 3831–3843 (2002).
Zeck, G.M. & Masland, R.H. Spike train signatures of retinal ganglion cell types. Eur. J. Neurosci. 26, 367–380 (2007).
Dorn, J.D. et al. The detection of motion by blind subjects with the Epiretinal 60-Electrode (Argus II) retinal prosthesis. JAMA Ophthalmol. 131, 183–189 (2013).
Wang, L. et al. Photovoltaic retinal prosthesis: implant fabrication and performance. J. Neural Eng. 9, 046014 (2012).
Zrenner, E. et al. Subretinal electronic chips allow blind patients to read letters and combine them to words. Proc. Biol. Sci. 278, 1489–1497 (2011).
Bi, A. et al. Ectopic expression of a microbial-type rhodopsin restores visual responses in mice with photoreceptor degeneration. Neuron 50, 23–33 (2006).
Busskamp, V., Picaud, S., Sahel, J.A. & Roska, B. Optogenetic therapy for retinitis pigmentosa. Gene Ther. 19, 169–175 (2012).
Lagali, P.S. et al. Light-activated channels targeted to ON bipolar cells restore visual function in retinal degeneration. Nat. Neurosci. 11, 667–675 (2008).
Nirenberg, S. & Pandarinath, C. Retinal prosthetic strategy with the capacity to restore normal vision. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 15012–15017 (2012).
Cai, C., Twyford, P. & Fried, S. The response of retinal neurons to high-frequency stimulation. J. Neural Eng. 10, 036009 (2013).
Jacobs, A.L. et al. Ruling out and ruling in neural codes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 5936–5941 (2009).
Rathbun, D.L., Alitto, H.J., Weyand, T.G. & Usrey, W.M. Interspike interval analysis of retinal ganglion cell receptive fields. J. Neurophysiol. 98, 911–919 (2007).
Berry, M.J., Warland, D.K. & Meister, M. The structure and precision of retinal spike trains. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94, 5411–5416 (1997).
Funke, K. & Worgotter, F. On the significance of temporally structured activity in the dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN). Prog. Neurobiol. 53, 67–119 (1997).
Schnitzer, M.J. & Meister, M. Multineuronal firing patterns in the signal from eye to brain. Neuron 37, 499–511 (2003).
Paxinos, G. & Franklin, K. The Mouse Brain in Stereotaxic Coordinates (Academic Press, 2001).
Reinhard, K. et al. Step-by-step instructions for retina recordings with perforated multi electrode arrays. PLoS ONE 9, e106148 (2014).
Yonehara, K. et al. Spatially asymmetric reorganization of inhibition establishes a motion-sensitive circuit. Nature 469, 407–410 (2011).
Gavrikov, K.E., Nilson, J.E., Dmitriev, A.V., Zucker, C.L. & Mangel, S.C. Dendritic compartmentalization of chloride cotransporters underlies directional responses of starburst amacrine cells in retina. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103, 18793–18798 (2006).
Hoover, J.L., Bond, C.E., Hoover, D.B. & Defoe, D.M. Effect of neurturin deficiency on cholinergic and catecholaminergic innervation of the murine eye. Exp. Eye Res. 122, 32–39 (2014).
Nikonov, S.S., Kholodenko, R., Lem, J. & Pugh, E.N. Jr. Physiological features of the S- and M-cone photoreceptors of wild-type mice from single-cell recordings. J. Gen. Physiol. 127, 359–374 (2006).
Szikra, T. et al. Rods in daylight act as relay cells for cone-driven horizontal cell–mediated surround inhibition. Nat. Neurosci. 10.1038/nn.3852 (26 October 2014).
Chichilnisky, E.J. A simple white noise analysis of neuronal light responses. Network 12, 199–213 (2001).
Lyubarsky, A.L., Daniele, L.L. & Pugh, E.N. Jr. From candelas to photoisomerizations in the mouse eye by rhodopsin bleaching in situ and the light-rearing dependence of the major components of the mouse ERG. Vision Res. 44, 3235–3251 (2004).
Jacobs, G.H. & Williams, G.A. Contributions of the mouse UV photopigment to the ERG and to vision. Doc. Ophthalmol. 115, 137–144 (2007).
We thank J. Wynne for technical assistance and M. Biel (LMU München) for supplying Cnga3−/− mice. This research was supported by funds of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) to the Werner Reichardt Centre for Integrative Neuroscience (DFG EXC 307), by the Bundesministerium für Bildung and Forschung (BMBF) to the Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience (FKZ 01GQ1002), by funds of the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC BB/1007296/1) and the European Commission (ERC Advanced Grant MeloVision) to R.J.L., a Christiane-Nüsslein-Volhard Stipend to A.T.-H., and a Pro-Retina Stipend to K.R.
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Integrated supplementary information
The retina was placed on a multi-electrode array and visual stimulation was achieved with a projector through the condenser of the microscope. Neutral density (ND) filters were used to decrease the mean luminance of the visual stimulation in 1-log-unit steps.
(a) Stimulus protocol. SR: SR-95531 (gabazine), Pic.: picrotoxin. (b–e) Examples of luminance- and GABA-blocker-dependent response patterns in three OFF cells (b,d,f) and two ON cell (c,e). Left: Spike rates at ND7 and ND6 luminance levels with and without GABA blockers. Right: One possible circuit scheme each which is consistent with the observed responses. The five examples represent the following categories of observations: (b) Luminance-dependent response changes not influenced by GABA (observed in n = 3 units; the example shows appearing early ON response at ND6 under both control and drug condition). Such cells changed their response properties identically under control and drug conditions between ND7 and ND6. Thus, these luminance-dependent response changes were independent of GABAergic regulation. (c) Luminance-dependent GABAergic masking of responses (n = 3; example cell has a delayed ON response masked at ND7). In such cells, light responses differed at ND7 and ND6 under control conditions, but not in the presence of GABA blockers. This suggests that GABAergic inhibition masked a response at one light level. (d) Luminance-independent GABAergic masking of responses (n = 12; example: unmasked early response at ND7 and ND6). Such cells did not show any luminance-dependent changes, neither in control nor with GABA blockers, but their responses were different between control and drug conditions within each light level. This suggests that GABAergic inhibition regulated responses at both luminance levels. Potentially, these masked responses might be revealed at other brightness levels. Note that the same phenomenon applies to the early ON responses in f. (e) GABA-dependent stabilization of responses (n = 13; the example illustrates this effect for early OFF responses). Such cells with stable responses under control conditions had changing responses under drug conditions. Thus, those changing response themselves were GABA-independent, while at the same time GABA stabilized the responses during the luminance-switch under control conditions. Note that the same phenomenon applies to the delayed ON responses in f. (f) GABA-dependent disinhibition (n = 6, the example shows disappearance of delayed ON response with GABA blockers at ND6). While in all examples above GABA blockers revealed additional responses, in few cells responses disappeared in GABA blockers (n = 2 at ND7, n = 5 at ND6, of which 1 unit was affected at both NDs). This suggests luminance-dependent disinhibitory GABAergic mechanisms.The phenomena described by these examples occurred in both ON and OFF cells. In some cells, we observed one phenomenon to the white step, and another phenomenon to the black step, highlighting the response asymmetry already observed in control conditions (Fig. 3). In summary, we found that the mechanism of GABAergic response regulation is highly diverse, and that it underlies some but not all luminance-dependent qualitative response changes.
Supplementary Figure 3 Luminance-dependent changes in ganglion cell responses to a naturalistic movie.
Raster plots: responses of individual ganglion cells to the movie stimulus (left) and to the full-field step stimulus (right). Shaded regions indicate events where the neuron was silent, even though it responded at other light levels. (a) ON ganglion cell with stable responses to the full-field step, but qualitative changes in its movie response. (b) OFF ganglion cell with changing responses to both movie and full-field step stimulus. (c) Response changes to full-field steps do not always occur together with response changes to movies, and vice versa. Numbers indicate the number of units in each group.
About this article
Cite this article
Tikidji-Hamburyan, A., Reinhard, K., Seitter, H. et al. Retinal output changes qualitatively with every change in ambient illuminance. Nat Neurosci 18, 66–74 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3891
Frontiers in Neuroscience (2021)
PLOS ONE (2021)
Scientific Reports (2021)
Nature Communications (2020)
Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science (2020)