Literature DB >> 1468354

Scotopic versus photopic pattern onset-offset electroretinograms.

S Pallas1, W Schmidt, E Dodt.   

Abstract

We investigated the contribution of rods and cones to the human pattern electroretinogram to onset and offset checkerboards of different spatial frequency and wavelength in a 39 degrees x 39 degrees field. Under strictly scotopic conditions, there was a negative potential at onset and a positive potential at offset, whereas under photopic conditions, there was a positive potential at onset and a negative/positive potential at offset. Thus, the waveform to pattern onset (offset) was that of the luminance electroretinogram to decreasing (increasing) luminances. For pattern onset, the sensitivity difference 486-601 nm under scotopic and photopic conditions closely followed the luminosity function of rods and cones. The amplitude of the scotopic onset response increased with check size up to 3 degrees 30' and that of the photopic onset response, up to 30'. With larger checks, the scotopic and photopic onset response markedly decreased. This indicates antagonistic center-surround organization of the receptive fields under both scotopic and photopic conditions. By contrast, the offset response monotonically increased with check size under scotopic and photopic conditions, which suggests a luminance component in the pattern electroretinogram. Consequently, the pattern electroretinogram to reversing checkerboards has to be regarded as a mixture of both pattern- (contrast) and luminance-specific components.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1468354     DOI: 10.1007/bf00156013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0012-4486            Impact factor:   2.379


  24 in total

1.  The electric response of the human eye.

Authors:  E D Adrian
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1945-06-29       Impact factor: 5.182

2.  HUMAN VISION AND THE SPECTRUM.

Authors:  G Wald
Journal:  Science       Date:  1945-06-29       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Threshold setting by the surround of cat retinal ganglion cells.

Authors:  H B Barlow; W R Levick
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1976-08       Impact factor: 5.182

4.  Contrast evoked responses in man.

Authors:  H Spekreijse; L H van der Twell; T Zuidema
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1973-08       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Retinal receptive fields under different adaptation levels studied with pattern-evoked ERG.

Authors:  M Korth; S Ilschner; O Sembritzki
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Human pattern-evoked electroretinogram.

Authors:  R F Hess; C L Baker
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1984-05       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Changes in spatial selectivity of pattern-ERG components with stimulus contrast.

Authors:  M Korth; R Rix
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  Pattern ERG in the monkey after section of the optic nerve.

Authors:  L Maffei; A Fiorentini; S Bisti; H Holländer
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Pattern-evoked responses and luminance-evoked responses in the human electroretinogram.

Authors:  M Korth
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1983-04       Impact factor: 5.182

10.  Human pattern-evoked retinal responses are altered by optic atrophy.

Authors:  W W Dawson; T M Maida; M L Rubin
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1982-06       Impact factor: 4.799

View more
  1 in total

1.  To see or not to see; the ability of the magno- and parvocellular response to manifest itself in the VEP determines its appearance to a pattern reversing and pattern onset stimulus.

Authors:  Valentine L Marcar; Lutz Jäncke
Journal:  Brain Behav       Date:  2016-08-25       Impact factor: 2.708

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.