| Literature DB >> 25750705 |
Pär Nyström1, Gustaf Gredebäck1, Sven Bölte2, Terje Falck-Ytter3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Post mortem brain tissue data and animal modeling work indicate cholinergic disruptions in autism. Moreover, the cholinergic system plays a key role in the early neurodevelopmental processes believed to be derailed early in life in individuals with the disorder. Yet, there is no data from human infants supporting a developmentally important role of this neurotransmitter system. Because the pupillary light reflex depends largely on cholinergic synaptic transmission, we assessed this reflex in a sample of infants at risk for autism as well as infants at low (average) risk.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25750705 PMCID: PMC4352563 DOI: 10.1186/s13229-015-0011-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Autism Impact factor: 7.509
Study group characteristics, final samples (mean/standard deviation)
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (days) | 312/15 | 313/14 | .807 |
| MSELb total score | 99/13 | 98/11 | .887 |
| MSEL VRc | 53/9 | 54/9 | .738 |
| MSEL FMd | 56/10 | 55/10 | .720 |
| MSEL RLe | 45/11 | 44/11 | .911 |
| MSEL ELf | 43/10 | 43/10 | .996 |
| SESg | −0.1/1.0 | 0.1/1.0 | .598 |
| Eye colorh | 1.5/1.0 | 1.3/0.9 | .656 |
aIndependent samples t-test; bMullen Scales of Early Learning (MSEL); cvisual reception (VR) subscale; dfine motor (FM) subscale; ereceptive language (RL) subscale; fexpressive language (EL) subscale; gsocioeconomic status (SES), calculated on the basis of parental education and income (equal weight), expressed as z-score; hExperimenter rated (0 to 3, 3 = darkest); high risk (HR); low risk (LR).
Figure 1Experimental setup and stimuli. (A) Pupillary light reflex measured using noninvasive eye-tracking technology (picture published with consent). (B) Brief flashes of light were shown on monitor, while eye tracker measured induced changes in pupil size.
Figure 2Stronger and faster pupillary light reflexes in infants at risk for autism. (A) Relative pupil constriction, (A0 2 − Am2)/A0 2, was calculated for individual trials. Latency was determined from the minima of the second derivative of the pupil-size time series (maximum constriction acceleration). Traces show actual data from one trial from one infant. (B) Scatterplot showing individual data for both measures. (C, D) Groups differed in both latency and constriction amplitude. *P < .05, ***P < .005; error bars show standard error of the mean.