Literature DB >> 28424291

Comparison of optomotor and optokinetic reflexes in mice.

Friedrich Kretschmer1, Momina Tariq1, Walid Chatila1, Beverly Wu1, Tudor Constantin Badea2.   

Abstract

During animal locomotion or position adjustments, the visual system uses image stabilization reflexes to compensate for global shifts in the visual scene. These reflexes elicit compensatory head movements (optomotor response, OMR) in unrestrained animals or compensatory eye movements (optokinetic response, OKR) in head-fixed or unrestrained animals exposed to globally rotating striped patterns. In mice, OMR are relatively easy to observe and find broad use in the rapid evaluation of visual function. OKR determinations are more involved experimentally but yield more stereotypical, easily quantifiable results. The relative contributions of head and eye movements to image stabilization in mice have not been investigated. We are using newly developed software and apparatus to accurately quantitate mouse head movements during OMR, quantitate eye movements during OKR, and determine eye movements in freely behaving mice. We provide the first direct comparison of OMR and OKR gains (head or eye velocity/stimulus velocity) and find that the two reflexes have comparable dependencies on stimulus luminance, contrast, spatial frequency, and velocity. OMR and OKR are similarly affected in genetically modified mice with defects in retinal ganglion cells (RGC) compared with wild-type, suggesting they are driven by the same sensory input (RGC type). OKR eye movements have much higher gains than the OMR head movements, but neither can fully compensate global visual shifts. However, combined eye and head movements can be detected in unrestrained mice performing OMR, suggesting they can cooperate to achieve image stabilization, as previously described for other species.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We provide the first quantitation of head gain during optomotor response in mice and show that optomotor and optokinetic responses have similar psychometric curves. Head gains are far smaller than eye gains. Unrestrained mice combine head and eye movements to respond to visual stimuli, and both monocular and binocular fields are used during optokinetic responses. Mouse OMR and OKR movements are heterogeneous under optimal and suboptimal stimulation and are affected in mice lacking ON direction-selective retinal ganglion cells.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Brn3b; Pou4f2; direction-selective retinal ganglion cells; mouse genetics; mouse visual system; optokinetic nystagmus; optokinetic response; optomotor response

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28424291      PMCID: PMC5498731          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00055.2017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  59 in total

Review 1.  Using eye movements to assess brain function in mice.

Authors:  John S Stahl
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  A psychophysical investigation of spatial vision in the normal and reeler mutant mouse.

Authors:  D G Sinex; L J Burdette; A L Pearlman
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Resetting fast phases of head and eye and their linkage in the frog.

Authors:  N Dieringer; W Precht; A R Blight
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Characterizing visual performance in mice: an objective and automated system based on the optokinetic reflex.

Authors:  Boris Benkner; Marion Mutter; Gerrit Ecke; Thomas A Münch
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2013-08-19       Impact factor: 1.912

5.  Optomotor test for wavelength sensitivity in guppyfish (Poecilia reticulata).

Authors:  S Anstis; P Hutahajan; P Cavanagh
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 1.886

Review 6.  Retinal degeneration mutants in the mouse.

Authors:  B Chang; N L Hawes; R E Hurd; M T Davisson; S Nusinowitz; J R Heckenlively
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  Rapid quantification of adult and developing mouse spatial vision using a virtual optomotor system.

Authors:  Glen T Prusky; Nazia M Alam; Steven Beekman; Robert M Douglas
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.799

8.  Control of human optokinetic nystagmus by the central and peripheral retina: effects of partial visual field masking, scotopic vision and central retinal scotomata.

Authors:  G C Van Die; H Collewijn
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1986-09-24       Impact factor: 3.252

9.  Age- and sex-related differences in contrast sensitivity in C57BL/6 mice.

Authors:  Bart van Alphen; Beerend H J Winkelman; Maarten A Frens
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2008-12-30       Impact factor: 4.799

10.  OMR-arena: automated measurement and stimulation system to determine mouse visual thresholds based on optomotor responses.

Authors:  Friedrich Kretschmer; Viola Kretschmer; Vincent P Kunze; Jutta Kretzberg
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-15       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  25 in total

1.  Spatiotemporal Contrast Sensitivity of Brown-Norway Rats under Scotopic and Photopic Illumination.

Authors:  Nicholas P Johnson; Sarah M Gregorich; Christopher L Passaglia
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 3.590

2.  Distinct inhibitory pathways control velocity and directional tuning in the mouse retina.

Authors:  Mathew T Summers; Marla B Feller
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 10.900

3.  A novel map of the mouse eye for orienting retinal topography in anatomical space.

Authors:  Maureen E Stabio; Katelyn B Sondereker; Sean D Haghgou; Brittany L Day; Berrien Chidsey; Shai Sabbah; Jordan M Renna
Journal:  J Comp Neurol       Date:  2018-04-29       Impact factor: 3.215

4.  A Neural Representation of Naturalistic Motion-Guided Behavior in the Zebrafish Brain.

Authors:  Tugce Yildizoglu; Clemens Riegler; James E Fitzgerald; Ruben Portugues
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2020-05-07       Impact factor: 10.834

5.  Magnetic eye tracking in mice.

Authors:  Hannah L Payne; Jennifer L Raymond
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2017-09-05       Impact factor: 8.713

6.  Daily visual stimulation in the critical period enhances multiple aspects of vision through BDNF-mediated pathways in the mouse retina.

Authors:  Amanda M Mui; Victoria Yang; Moe H Aung; Jieming Fu; Adewumi N Adekunle; Brian C Prall; Curran S Sidhu; Han Na Park; Jeffrey H Boatright; P Michael Iuvone; Machelle T Pardue
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-06       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Optimization of Optomotor Response-based Visual Function Assessment in Mice.

Authors:  Cong Shi; Xuedong Yuan; Karen Chang; Kin-Sang Cho; Xinmin Simon Xie; Dong Feng Chen; Gang Luo
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-06-26       Impact factor: 4.996

8.  Vigabatrin-Induced Retinal Functional Alterations and Second-Order Neuron Plasticity in C57BL/6J Mice.

Authors:  Kore Chan; Mrinalini Hoon; Bikash R Pattnaik; James N Ver Hoeve; Brad Wahlgren; Shawna Gloe; Jeremy Williams; Brenna Wetherbee; Julie A Kiland; Kara R Vogel; Erwin Jansen; Gajja Salomons; Dana Walters; Jean-Baptiste Roullet; K Michael Gibson; Gillian J McLellan
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2020-02-07       Impact factor: 4.799

9.  Atypical visual processing in a mouse model of autism.

Authors:  Ning Cheng; Eden Pagtalunan; Abdulrahman Abushaibah; Jessica Naidu; William K Stell; Jong M Rho; Yves Sauvé
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  The opto-locomotor reflex as a tool to measure sensitivity to moving random dot patterns in mice.

Authors:  L A M H Kirkels; W Zhang; M N Havenith; P Tiesinga; J Glennon; R J A van Wezel; J Duijnhouwer
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.