April 2011
Volume 52, Issue 14
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2011
The Contribution Of The Rod/Melanopsin Driven Ganglion Cells To The Dynamic Pupil Light Reflex Response
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Wei Bi
    Applied Vision Research Centre, City University London, London, United Kingdom
  • Seiichi Tsujimura
    Information Science and Biomedical Engineering, Kagoshima University, Kagoshima, Japan
  • Gordon T. Plant
    Neurology, National Hospital Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, United Kingdom
  • John L. Barbur
    Applied Vision Research Centre, City University London, London, United Kingdom
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  Wei Bi, None; Seiichi Tsujimura, None; Gordon T. Plant, None; John L. Barbur, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2011, Vol.52, 5287. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Wei Bi, Seiichi Tsujimura, Gordon T. Plant, John L. Barbur; The Contribution Of The Rod/Melanopsin Driven Ganglion Cells To The Dynamic Pupil Light Reflex Response. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2011;52(14):5287.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose: : Recent studies (Tsujimura et al, Proc. R. Soc. B, 277, 2485, 2010) have shown that the steady-state size of the pupil during long exposure to intense stimuli and the corresponding sustained constriction in darkness following the offset of the stimulus (Gamblin et al, Vision. Res., 47, 946, 2007) are likely to involve melanopsin signals through intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs). These cells also receive spatially pooled signals from rod and cone photoreceptors and the extent to which melanopsin contributes to rapid pupil responses elicited with brief stimuli remains less clear. The purpose of this study was to examine how the dynamic pupil light reflex response changes with the level of light adaptation for stimuli that isolate luminance, colour or combined rod and melanopsin.

Methods: : An integrating sphere was used to homogenise the light output of four LED sources (selected to span the visual spectrum) which were modulated temporally to produce a 2s sinusoidal envelope of luminance, colour or combined rod and melanopsin. Pupil responses were measured at three light levels: 456, 74.4 and 4.8 cd/m2. The study involved 6 normal subjects and two patients with congenital stationary night blindness (CSNB).

Results: : In normal subjects, each of the three stimuli produced brief constrictions of the pupil at stimulus onset, with larger response amplitudes at lower light levels. Consistent with previous studies, the colour modulation also produced a large response at stimulus offset. The rod / melanopsin isolation condition yields larger response latencies, with the largest difference observed at the lowest light level. The patients with CSNB yield normal responses to colour and luminance modulation, but much reduced or absent pupil constriction to rod/melanopsin modulation at each light level.

Conclusions: : When carefully interpreted, the findings from this study suggest that pupil responses to briefly presented stimuli are mediated largely by rod and cone signals with little or no contribution from melanopsin. The results also suggest that, although more sluggish, rod signals remain unsaturated and contribute to dynamic pupil responses at much higher light levels.

Keywords: pupillary reflex • ganglion cells • photoreceptors 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.