RGC responses are highly dynamic and functionally dependent on ambient light.
27 RGCs adjust their behavior, including spatial and temporal tuning,
22,24,28 contrast gain,
26,28 linearity,
23 and even polarity,
25,29 according to the light level to which they are adapted. This capacity has important functional implications in contrast sensitivity, motion detection,
41 and natural scene perception.
42 Using MEA recording of individual RGCs in the bead model of IOP elevation, this manuscript clarifies several new light-dependent spatial and temporal changes in normal RGCs and the effect of IOP level on these adaptations. Interestingly, we detected several changes in RGC properties after exposure to low (low IOP) but not high (high IOP) levels of IOP elevation. This implies that some aspects of RGC physiology are extremely sensitive to IOP, and that their detection may only occur in a short window shortly after IOP elevation and prior to widespread progressive RGC injury due to higher IOP levels.
In this manuscript, we exclusively studied RGCs with both photopic and scotopic responses. Almost all such RGCs displayed some degree of center RF size alteration with a change in lighting from scotopic to photopic levels (
Fig. 3A).
35 Many had a larger center RF under scotopic light, a finding that is consistent with published works.
22,43 However, for many other RGCs, RF center size changed in the opposite direction. Overall, the effects on the population were small, despite a wide range of RF center variation within the entire population (
Fig. 3B,
3C). We believe that this is the result of functional discretion among the RGCs, for example, not all RGCs adapt to light in the same way in terms of spatial selectivity.
43 There was no obvious difference in this RGC property because of IOP elevation or among RGC subtypes.
To expand our study beyond RF size, we analyzed the dynamics of RF spatial structure through center-surround interactions. Antagonistic surround is effectively detected by checkerboard white noise stimulation, and an empirical 1-to-3 σ versus 4-to-9 σ spatial schematic successfully separates center and surround RFs in most RGCs.
18,31,32,35,44 We have previously demonstrated that under photopic lighting, surround strength measured by this way was negatively affected by IOP elevation.
18 However, increased IOP may also impair RF surround on a more dynamic level. In this manuscript, we used a novel, general computational approach and introduced new metrics (transitional zone and its spatial shift) to investigate the IOP effects on spatial dynamics between center and surround RF. The transitional zone reflects the spatial extent where surround RF exerts the most strength relative to center RF. With this method, we found that transitional zone shifting was highly dynamic depending on lighting conditions. In a majority of RGCs, there was a sharpening of the central RF, manifested by a large spatial shift of the transitional zone, when the cell was exposed to brighter ambient light (
Fig. 4,
Table). This is in line with classical studies that identified changes in surround strength with dark adaptation
45,46 and presumably occur through surround recruitment mechanisms in the inner retina.
22,43 Among RGCs exposed to low levels of IOP elevation, however, we found that this process of transitional zone shift with surround recruitment occurred much less frequently (
Table), which depressed the overall magnitude of the spatial shift of the transitional zone (
Fig. 4). This suggests that lighting-dependent center-surround interactions, beyond global surround strength, can be altered by pathologic conditions, such as elevated IOP. Interestingly, we did not see this effect among RGCs exposed to higher levels of IOP.
RGCs also displayed robust light-dependent temporal property changes.
24,26,28,35,44 Specifically, under scotopic light, the STA center and surround RF peak time extended significantly in all RGCs regardless of IOP elevation or ON/OFF subtype, suggesting that these are core properties of RGCs that are resistant to the effects of IOP (
Figs. 5 and
6). However, the magnitude of this property varied among experimental groups. Specifically, control (from saline injected eyes) RGCs displayed a further increase of the STA center peak time extension under scotopic light, which was mitigated by elevated IOP, regardless of level. A similar procedural effect with this model has been previously reported.
18
How can we explain the light-dependent spatial and temporal dynamics we observed? Most interestingly, we only detected changes in the overall magnitude of the spatial shift of the transitional zone in RGCs exposed to low IOP elevation. There are at least two potential explanations for this observation: (1) higher levels of IOP induce distinct changes in RGC physiology, which differ from the effects induced by low IOP elevation; and (2) IOP level affects upstream circuitry in a variable way according to IOP level to generate these RGC effects. Either interpretation is consistent with the literature: (1) the level of IOP elevation has important transcriptional and physiologic effects that are not always linear,
18,20,21 and there is ample clinical evidence that higher IOP leads to both a higher incidence and severity of glaucoma
9,10,47; and (2) preganglionic gap junctions are a key structural foundation for light-dependent dynamics, and horizontal components of the retinal connectome (especially amacrine cells) are exquisitely sensitive to IOP.
12,16,28,43,48–51 With this latter explanation, our consistent findings among RGCs exposed to low but not high IOP suggest that differential preganglionic effects may occur at different IOP levels. Further study across a wider range of IOP levels and IOP exposure durations in conjunction with extensive sampling of RGCs will be required to define the IOP level–dependent mechanisms behind these observations.
RGCs exposed to low IOP elevation were also more likely to have a scotopic STA than any other experimental group. This was an unexpected and intriguing result that may represent an “irritated” state in which additional firing occurs, making the scotopic STA more detectable. Because this increased firing is not seen in the high IOP groups, this suggests either an RGC transition to a different response state with higher IOP, or a distinct reaction at high IOP. Although we are unable to record from the same set of RGCs at more than one IOP level or across multiple time points to demonstrate this directly, an RGC transition state is implied by prior physiologic and transcriptional studies.
20,21 If present here, this suggests that we are truly studying the most subtle changes in RGCs following IOP elevation. Additional studies to elaborate on these possibilities, why RGC irritation and scotopic STA detection are diminished with increased levels of IOP elevation and additional RGC injury, and how they underlie the light-dependent adaptation properties seen earlier will be insightful.
RGCs exposed to low IOP elevations also had a markedly increased spontaneous firing rate compared with all other groups. Again, this may represent an “irritated” RGC state brought on only by low IOP elevations. Regardless, this result is different from those seen by others, which largely report a linear reduction in spontaneous firing rate with either IOP level or duration of exposure to IOP.
15,18,19 This discrepancy can be explained by differences in inclusion criteria; this manuscript studied exclusively RGCs with both photopic and scotopic STAs, whereas published works studied RGCs with photopic STAs and did not account for the presence of a scotopic STA. RGCs that retain scotopic responses after IOP elevation may therefore behave somewhat differently from the population. Because RGCs exposed to low IOP elevation were more likely to have a scotopic STA than all other experimental groups, they could be driving the overall spontaneous firing rates of the group to higher levels, potentially leading to an overestimate of the spontaneous firing rate of the overall RGC population. This discrepancy would be consistent with the differential RGC responses to IOP seen in several previous studies, and would expand them to include IOP level-dependent susceptibilities.
15,17–20,52,53