May 2008
Volume 49, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2008
Circadian Modulation of Ganglion-Cell Phototransduction
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • S. Weng
    Neuroscience, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
  • K. Y. Wong
    Neuroscience, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
  • D. M. Berson
    Neuroscience, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  S. Weng, None; K.Y. Wong, None; D.M. Berson, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  NIH Grant EY17137
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2008, Vol.49, 5785. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      S. Weng, K. Y. Wong, D. M. Berson; Circadian Modulation of Ganglion-Cell Phototransduction. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2008;49(13):5785. doi:

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Purpose: : Intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) synchronize the central circadian pacemaker to the solar cycle. It is unknown whether the photosensitivity of these cells is subject to circadian modulation, as image-forming retinal networks are. Because such modulation could affect the phase-dependence of photic clock resetting, we sought to learn whether intrinsic, melanopsin-driven photoresponses show circadian oscillations.

Methods: : Adult rats were entrained to a 12 hr: 12 hr light-dark (LD) cycle, then kept in constant darkness (DD) for 12-60 hr preceding retinal harvest to minimize effects of light adaptation. Circadian time (CT) at harvest was extrapolated from the last LD cycle assuming period (tau) to be 24.1 hr. Retinas were isolated in dim red light and mounted on multielectrode arrays. Rod/cone signals were silenced with glutamate receptor blockers so that light activated only ipRGCs, recognizable from their sluggish, sustained, and slowly terminating photoresponses. Sensitivity was probed with an ascending series of 10 s white-light stimuli.

Results: : Intensity-response functions were indistinguishable among 3 of the 4 phases tested: early day (CT0-1), midday (CT6-7), and midnight (CT18-19). In the early night (CT12-13), however, responses to the brightest stimuli were significantly, if modestly, elevated (~20%). This reflected an increase in response gain rather than in sensitivity because threshold was unchanged.

Conclusions: : Circadian modulation of ipRGCs’ intrinsic photoresponses is modest, consisting of slightly augmented response gain early in subjective night. This may be related to the rise in melanopsin mRNA and protein levels at roughly this circadian phase (e.g., Sakamoto et al., 2005). However, the decrease in threshold that this would predict is not observed and other mechanisms may dominate. Our results suggest that intraretinal rhythms in ipRGC photosensitivity contribute little to the mechanism by which circadian phase gates the photic resetting of the central clock. Modulation of extrinsic, synaptic inputs to ipRGCs remain a possibility.

Keywords: ganglion cells • photoreceptors • circadian rhythms 

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.