Literature DB >> 16516259

Optical aberrations in the mouse eye.

Elena García de la Cera1, Guadalupe Rodríguez, Lourdes Llorente, Frank Schaeffel, Susana Marcos.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The mouse eye is a widely used model for retinal disease and has potential to become a model for myopia. Studies of retinal disease will benefit from imaging the fundus in vivo. Experimental models of myopia often rely on manipulation of the visual experience. In both cases, knowledge of the optical quality of the eye, and in particular, the retinal image quality degradation imposed by the ocular aberrations is essential. In this study, we measured the ocular aberrations in the wild type mouse.
METHODS: Twelve eyes from six four-week old black C57BL/6 wild type mice were studied. Measurements were done on awake animals, one being also measured under anesthesia for comparative purposes. Ocular aberrations were measured using a custom-built Hartmann-Shack system (using 680-nm illumination). Wave aberrations are reported up to fourth order Zernike polynomials. Spherical equivalent and astigmatism were obtained from the 2nd order Zernike terms. Modulation Transfer Functions (MTF) were estimated for the best focus, and through-focus, to estimate depth-of-focus. All reported data were for 1.5-mm pupils.
RESULTS: Hartmann-Shack refractions were consistently hyperopic (10.12+/-1.41 D, mean and standard deviation) and astigmatism was present in many of the eyes (3.64+/-3.70 D, on average). Spherical aberration was positive in all eyes (0.15+/-0.07 microm) and coma terms RMS were significantly high compared to other Zernike terms (0.10+/-0.03 microm). MTFs estimated from wave aberrations show a modulation of 0.4 at 2c/deg, for best focus (and 0.15 without cancelling the measured defocus). For that spatial frequency, depth-of-focus estimated from through-focus modulation data using the Rayleigh criterion was 6D. Aberrations in the eye of one anesthetized mouse were higher than in the same eye of the awake animal.
CONCLUSIONS: Hyperopic refractions in the mouse eye are consistent with previous retinoscopic data. The optics of the mouse eye is far from being diffraction-limited at 1.5-mm pupil, with significant amounts of spherical aberration and coma. However, estimates of MTFs from wave aberrations are higher than previously reported using a double-pass technique, resulting in smaller depth-of-field predictions. Despite the large degradation imposed by the aberrations these are lower than the amount of aberrations typically corrected by available correction techniques (i.e., adaptive optics). On the other hand, aberrations do not seem to be the limiting factor in the mouse spatial resolution. While the mouse optics are much more degraded than in other experimental models of myopia, its tolerance to large amounts of defocus does not seem to be determined entirely by the ocular aberrations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16516259     DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2006.01.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  29 in total

1.  In vivo fluorescent imaging of the mouse retina using adaptive optics.

Authors:  David P Biss; Daniel Sumorok; Stephen A Burns; Robert H Webb; Yaopeng Zhou; Thomas G Bifano; Daniel Côté; Israel Veilleux; Parisa Zamiri; Charles P Lin
Journal:  Opt Lett       Date:  2007-03-15       Impact factor: 3.776

2.  Dimensions and morphology of the cornea in three strains of mice.

Authors:  Johanna Tukler Henriksson; Alison M McDermott; Jan P G Bergmanson
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2009-03-05       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  Variational analysis of the mouse and rat eye optical parameters.

Authors:  Gurinder Bawa; Tatiana V Tkatchenko; Ivan Avrutsky; Andrei V Tkatchenko
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 3.732

4.  Effect of contact lens on optical coherence tomography imaging of rodent retina.

Authors:  Xiaojing Liu; Chia-Hao Wang; Cuixia Dai; Adam Camesa; Hao F Zhang; Shuliang Jiao
Journal:  Curr Eye Res       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 2.424

Review 5.  From optics to attention: visual perception in barn owls.

Authors:  Wolf M Harmening; Hermann Wagner
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2011-07-07       Impact factor: 1.836

6.  Mice Discriminate Stereoscopic Surfaces Without Fixating in Depth.

Authors:  Jason M Samonds; Veronica Choi; Nicholas J Priebe
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-08-28       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Binocular integration and disparity selectivity in mouse primary visual cortex.

Authors:  Benjamin Scholl; Johannes Burge; Nicholas J Priebe
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-03-20       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Experience-dependent and independent binocular correspondence of receptive field subregions in mouse visual cortex.

Authors:  Rashmi Sarnaik; Bor-Shuen Wang; Jianhua Cang
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 5.357

9.  Wave aberrations in rhesus monkeys with vision-induced ametropias.

Authors:  Ramkumar Ramamirtham; Chea-Su Kee; Li-Fang Hung; Ying Qiao-Grider; Juan Huang; Austin Roorda; Earl L Smith
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2007-09-06       Impact factor: 1.886

10.  Intervening inhibition underlies simple-cell receptive field structure in visual cortex.

Authors:  Bao-hua Liu; Pingyang Li; Yujiao J Sun; Ya-tang Li; Li I Zhang; Huizhong Whit Tao
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2009-11-29       Impact factor: 24.884

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.