» Articles » PMID: 29134295

Rod- Versus Cone-driven ERGs at Different Stimulus Sizes in Normal Subjects and Retinitis Pigmentosa Patients

Overview
Journal Doc Ophthalmol
Specialty Ophthalmology
Date 2017 Nov 15
PMID 29134295
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: To study how rod- and cone-driven responses depend on stimulus size in normal subjects and patients with retinitis pigmentosa (RP), and to show that comparisons between responses to full-field (FF) and smaller stimuli can be useful in diagnosing and monitoring disorders of the peripheral retina without the need for lengthy dark adaptation periods.

Method: The triple silent substitution technique was used to isolate L-cone-, M-cone- and rod-driven ERGs with 19, 18 and 33% photoreceptor contrasts, respectively, under identical mean luminance conditions. Experiments were conducted on five normal subjects and three RP patients. ERGs on control subjects were recorded at nine different temporal frequencies (between 2 and 60 Hz) for five different stimulus sizes: FF, 70°, 60°, 50° and 40° diameter circular stimuli. Experiments on RP patients involved rod- and L-cone-driven ERG measurements with FF and 40° stimuli at 8 and 48 Hz. Response amplitudes were defined as those of the first harmonic component after Fourier analysis.

Results: In normal subjects, rod-driven responses displayed a fundamentally different behavior than cone-driven responses, particularly at low temporal frequencies. At low and intermediate temporal frequencies (≤ 12 Hz), rod-driven signals increased by a factor of about four when measured with smaller stimuli. In contrast, L- and M-cone-driven responses in this frequency region did not change substantially with stimulus size. At high temporal frequencies (≥ 24 Hz), both rod- and cone-driven response amplitudes decreased with decreasing stimulus size. Signals obtained from rod-isolating stimuli under these conditions are likely artefactual. Interestingly, in RP patients, both rod-driven and L-cone-driven ERGs were similar using 40° and FF stimuli.

Conclusion: The increased responses with smaller stimuli in normal subjects to rod-isolating stimuli indicate that a fundamentally different mechanism drives the ERGs in comparison with the cone-driven responses. We propose that the increased responses are caused by stray light stimulating the peripheral retina, thereby allowing peripheral rod-driven function to be studied using the triple silent substitution technique at photopic luminances. The method is effective in studying impaired peripheral rod- and cone- function in RP patients.

Citing Articles

Electroretinographic responses to periodic stimuli in primates and the relevance for visual perception and for clinical studies.

Kremers J, Huchzermeyer C Vis Neurosci. 2024; 41:E004.

PMID: 39523890 PMC: 11579838. DOI: 10.1017/S0952523824000038.


Perifoveal Cone- and Rod-Mediated Temporal Contrast Sensitivities in Stargardt Disease/Fundus Flavimaculatus.

Fars J, Pasutto F, Kremers J, Huchzermeyer C Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2021; 62(14):24.

PMID: 34807235 PMC: 8626853. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.62.14.24.


Responses of Postreceptoral Pathways Elicited by L- and M-Cone Isolating ON- and OFF-Electroretinograms in Glaucoma Patients.

Aher A, Horn F, Huchzermeyer C, Lammer R, Kremers J Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2021; 62(9):14.

PMID: 34241626 PMC: 8287051. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.62.9.14.


The influence of temporal frequency and stimulus size on the relative contribution of luminance and L-/M-cone opponent mechanisms in heterochromatic flicker ERGs.

Kremers J, Aher A, Popov Y, Mirsalehi M, Huchzermeyer C Doc Ophthalmol. 2021; 143(2):207-220.

PMID: 33886039 PMC: 8494685. DOI: 10.1007/s10633-021-09837-9.


Comparison of macaque and human L- and M-cone driven electroretinograms.

Kremers J, Aher A, Parry N, Patel N, Frishman L Exp Eye Res. 2021; 206:108556.

PMID: 33794198 PMC: 8111691. DOI: 10.1016/j.exer.2021.108556.

References
1.
Gouras P, Carr R . ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL STUDIES IN EARLY RETINITIS PIGMENTOSA. Arch Ophthalmol. 1964; 72:104-10. DOI: 10.1001/archopht.1964.00970020106022. View

2.
Challa N, McKeefry D, Parry N, Kremers J, Murray I, Panorgias A . L- and M-cone input to 12Hz and 30Hz flicker ERGs across the human retina. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2010; 30(5):503-10. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2010.00758.x. View

3.
DONNER K, Rushton W . Retinal stimulation by light substitution. J Physiol. 1959; 149:288-302. PMC: 1363090. DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.1959.sp006340. View

4.
Huchzermeyer C, Kremers J . Perifoveal S-cone and rod-driven temporal contrast sensitivities at different retinal illuminances. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 2017; 34(2):171-183. DOI: 10.1364/JOSAA.34.000171. View

5.
Ripamonti C, Woo W, Crowther E, Stockman A . The S-cone contribution to luminance depends on the M- and L-cone adaptation levels: silent surrounds?. J Vis. 2009; 9(3):10.1-16. DOI: 10.1167/9.3.10. View