Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T05:23:27.346Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Natural images and contrast encoding in bipolar cells in the retina of the land- and aquatic-phase tiger salamander

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2006

DWIGHT A. BURKHARDT ,
PATRICK K. FAHEY  and
MICHAEL A. SIKORA
DWIGHT A. BURKHARDT
Affiliation:
Departments of Psychology and Graduate Program of Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
PATRICK K. FAHEY
Affiliation:
Departments of Psychology and Graduate Program of Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
MICHAEL A. SIKORA
Affiliation:
Departments of Psychology and Graduate Program of Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Intracellular recordings were obtained from 57 cone-driven bipolar cells in the light-adapted retina of the land-phase (adult) tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum). Responses to flashes of negative and positive contrast for centered spots of optimum spatial dimensions were analyzed as a function of contrast magnitude. On average, the contrast/response curves of depolarizing and hyperpolarizing bipolar cells in the land-phase animals were remarkably similar to those of aquatic-phase animals. Thus, the primary retinal mechanisms mediating contrast coding in the outer retina are conserved as the salamander evolves from the aquatic to the land phase. To evaluate contrast encoding in the context of natural environments, the distribution of contrasts in natural images was measured for 65 scenes. The results, in general agreement with other reports, show that the vast majority of contrasts in nature are very small. The efficient coding hypothesis of Laughlin was examined by comparing the average contrast/response curves of bipolar cells with the cumulative probability distribution of contrasts in natural images. Efficient coding was found at 20 cd/m2 but at lower levels of light adaptation, the contrast/response curves were much too shallow. Further experiments show that two fundamental physiological factors—light adaptation and the nonlinear transfer across the cone-bipolar synapse are essential for the emergence of efficient contrast coding. For both land- and aquatic-based animals, the extent and symmetry of the dynamic range of the contrast/response curves of both classes of bipolar cells varied greatly from cell to cell. This apparent substrate for distributed encoding is established at the bipolar cell level, since it is not found in cones. As a result, the dynamic range of the bipolar cell population brackets the distribution of contrasts found in natural images.

Keywords

Retinal bipolar cellsContrast encodingNatural imagesLand-phase tiger salamanderHorizontal cellsRetina
Type
Research Article
Information
Visual Neuroscience , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , January 2006 , pp. 35 - 47
Copyright
2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Balboa, R.M. & Grzywacz, N.M. (2003). Power spectra and distribution of contrasts of natural images from different habitats. Vision Research 43, 2527–2537.Google Scholar
Burkhardt, D.A. (2001). Light adaptation and contrast in the outer retina. In Progress in Brain Research. Concepts and Challenges in Retinal Biology. A Tribute to John E. Dowling, Vol. 131, ed. Kolb, H., Wu, S. & Ripps, H., pp. 407–418. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Burkhardt, D.A. & Fahey, P.K. (1998). Contrast enhancement and distributed encoding by bipolar cells in the retina. Journal of Neurophysiology 80, 1070–1081.Google Scholar
Burkhardt, D.A., Fahey, P.K., & Sikora, M. (1998). Responses of ganglion cells to contrast steps in the light-adapted retina of the tiger salamander. Visual Neuroscience 15, 219–229.Google Scholar
Burkhardt, D.A. & Fahey, P.K. (1999). Contrast rectification and distributed encoding by on-off amacrine cells in the retina. Journal of Neurophysiology 81, 1676–1688.Google Scholar
Burkhardt, D.A., Fahey, P.K., & Sikora, M.A. (2004). Retinal bipolar cells: Contrast encoding for sinusoidal modulation and steps of luminance contrast. Visual Neuroscience 21, 883–893.Google Scholar
Clatworthy, P.L., Chirimuuta, M., Lauritzen, J.S., & Tolhurst, D.J. (2003). Coding of contrasts in natural images by populations of neurones in primary visual cortex (V1). Vision Research 43, 1983–2001.Google Scholar
Copenhagen, D.R. (2004). Excitation in the retina: The flow, filtering, and molecules of visual signaling in the glutamatergic pathways from photoreceptors to ganglion cells. In The Visual Neurosciences, Vol. 1, ed. Chalupa, L.M. & Werner, J.S., pp. 320–333. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Dacey, D., Packer, O.S., Diller, L., Brainard, D., Peterson, B., & Lee, B. (2000). Center surround receptive field structure of cone bipolar cells in primate retina. Vision Research 40, 1801–1811.Google Scholar
DeVries, S.H. (2000). Bipolar cells use kainate and AMPA receptors to filter visual information. Neuron 28, 847–856.Google Scholar
Fahey, P.K. & Burkhardt, D.A. (2001). Effects of light adaptation on contrast processing in bipolar cells in the retina. Visual Neuroscience 18, 581–597.Google Scholar
Fahey, P.K. & Burkhardt, D.A. (2003). Center-surround organization in bipolar cells: Symmetry for opposing contrasts. Visual Neuroscience 20, 1–10.Google Scholar
Hare, W.A. & Owen, W.G. (1990). Spatial organization of the bipolar cell's receptive field in the retina of the tiger salamander. Journal of Physiology (London) 421, 223–245.Google Scholar
Hare, W.A. & Owen, W.G. (1995). Similar effects of carbachol and dopamine on neurons in the distal retina of the tiger salamander. Visual Neuroscience 12, 443–455.Google Scholar
Laughlin, S.B. (1981). A simple coding procedure enhances a neuron's information capacity. Zeitschrift Naturforschung 36c, 910–912.Google Scholar
Laughlin, S.B. (1987). Form and function in retinal processing. Trends in Neuroscience 10, 478–483.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. & Kolb, H. (2004). ON and OFF pathways in the vertebrate retina and visual system. In The Visual Neurosciences, Vol. 1, ed. Chalupa, L.M. & Werner, J.S., pp. 260–278. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Pough, F.H., Andrews, R.M., Cadle, J.E., Crump, M.L., Sasvitzky, A.H., & Wells, K.D. (2001). Herpetology. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Rieke, F. (2001). Temporal contrast adaptation in salamander bipolar cells. Journal of Neuroscience 21, 9445–9454.Google Scholar
Ruderman, D.L. & Bialek, W. (1994). Statistics of natural images: scaling in the woods. Physical Review Letters 73, 814–817.Google Scholar
Simoncelli, E.P. & Olshausen, B.A. (2001). Natural image statistics and neural representation. Annual Review of Neuroscience 24, 1193–1216.Google Scholar
Sterling, P. (2004). How retinal circuits optimize the transfer of visual information. In The Visual Neurosciences, Vol. 1, ed. Chalupa, L.M. & Werner, J.S., pp. 234–259. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Tadmor, Y. & Tolhurst, D.J. (2000). Calculating the contrasts that retinal ganglion cells and LGN neurones encounter in natural scenes. Vision Research 40, 3145–3157.Google Scholar
Thoreson, W.B. & Burkhardt, D.A. (2003). Contrast encoding in retinal bipolar cells: Current vs. voltage. Visual Neuroscience 20, 19–28.Google Scholar
Vu, T.Q., McCarthy, S.T., & Owen, W.G. (1997). Linear transduction of natural stimuli by dark-adapted and light-adapted rods of the salamander, Ambystoma tigrinum. Journal of Physiology 505, 193–204.Google Scholar
Werblin, F.S. (1978). Transmission along and between rods in the tiger salamander retina. Journal of Physiology 280, 449–470.Google Scholar
Werblin, F.S. (1991). Synaptic connections, receptive fields, and patterns of activity in the tiger salamander retina. Investigative Ophthalmology 32, 459–483.Google Scholar
Werblin, F.S. & Dowling, J.E. (1968). Organization of the retina of the mudpuppy, Necturus maculosus. II. Intracellular recording. Journal of Neurophysiology 32, 339–355.Google Scholar
Wu, S.M. (1994). Synaptic transmission in the outer retina. Annual Review of Physiology 56, 141–168.Google Scholar
Wu, S.M. (2003). Intracelluar light responses and synaptic organization of the vertebrate retina. In Adler's Physiology of the Eye, 10th edition, ed. Kaufman, P.K. & Alm, A., pp. 422–438. St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby.
Yang, X.L. & Wu, S.M. (1991). Feedforward lateral inhibition in retinal bipolar cells: Input–output relation of the horizontal cell-depolarizing bipolar cell synapse. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U. S. A. 88, 3310–3313.Google Scholar
Zug, G.R., Vitt, L., & Caldwell, J.P. (2001). Herpetology, 2nd ed. San Diego, California: Academic Press.