Response of carp (Cyprinus carpio) horizontal cells to heterochromatic flicker photometry

• Published in: Visual neuroscience 2006-05, Vol.23 (3-4), p.437-440
• Main Authors: DE AGUIAR, MARLISON JOSÉ L., VENTURA, DORA FIX, FILHO, MANOEL DA SILVA, DE SOUZA, JOHN MANUEL, MACIEL, ROGÉRIO, LEE, BARRY B.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Animals; Behavior; Carp; Carps - physiology; Color Perception - physiology; Color vision; Dissection; Equiluminance; Fiber optics; Flicker Fusion - physiology; Heterochromatic flicker photometry; In Vitro Techniques; Light; Membrane Potentials - physiology; Photic Stimulation - methods; Photometry - methods; PHYSIOLOGY/ANATOMY; Retina; Retina - cytology; Retinal horizontal cells; Retinal Horizontal Cells - physiology; Scholarships & fellowships; Technical support
• ISSN: 0952-5238; 1469-8714
• DOI: 10.1017/S0952523806233273

The objective of the present work was to determine the interaction of cone inputs in the response of horizontal cells using heterochromatic flicker photometry (HFP). Intracellular electrophysiological recordings were made in horizontal cells of isolated retinae of carp maintained in physiological solution, with the receptor side up. Sharp glass microelectrodes filled with 3 M KCl solution with resistances between 100 and 120 MΩ were used. Stimuli comprised six cycles of two 6-Hz sinusoidal light waves in counterphase adjusted for the same number of quanta: a green light (550 nm) from a monochromator with a Xenon lamp and an LED red light (628 nm). The stimulation program consisted of 10 steps with the 550-nm wave at constant amplitude, while the 628-nm wave varied in increments of 10% up to 100%, followed by another 10 steps with the 628-nm wave at constant amplitude while the 550-nm wave varied in increments of 10% up to 100%. We recorded responses from four different horizontal cell classes: H1 (monophasic, broadband, n = 37), H2 (biphasic, red-green color-opponent, n = 13), and H3 (biphasic, blue-yellow color-opponent, n = 2) cone horizontal cells; and RH (monophasic, broadband, n = 3) rod horizontal cells. H1 and RH horizontal cells showed a similar cancellation point at a heterochromatic mixture consistent with mixed inputs from 630- and 550-nm cones. No cancellation point was found for the H2 cell class. Fish H1 cells add cone inputs and signal “luminance” in light levels appropriate for cone stimulation. The same occurs with RH cells, which also signal “luminance,” but in light levels appropriate for rod work. For both cell classes there is an HFP cancellation point occurring at a combination of 628-nm and 550-nm lights in opposing phase that leads to the cancellation of the cell's response. No cancellation was found for H2 and H3 cells, which are the chromatically opponent horizontal cells in lower vertebrates.