Cone signals divide into parallel ON and OFF bipolar cell pathways, which respond to objects brighter or darker than the background and release glutamate onto the corresponding type of ganglion cell. It is assumed that ganglion cell excitatory responses are driven by these bipolar cell synapses. Here, we report an additional mechanism: OFF ganglion cells were driven in part by the removal of synaptic inhibition (

The distinctive red-green dimension of human and nonhuman primate color perception arose relatively recently in the primate lineage with the appearance of separate long (L) and middle (M) wavelength-sensitive cone photoreceptor types. "Midget" ganglion cells of the retina use center-surround receptive field structure to combine L and M cone signals antagonistically and thereby establish a "redgreen, color-opponent" visual pathway. However, the synaptic origin of red-green opponency is unknown, and conflicting evidence for either random or L versus M cone-selective inhibitory circuits has divergent implications for the developmental and evolutionary origins of trichromatic color vision. Here we directly measure the synaptic conductances evoked by selective L or M cone stimulation in the midget ganglion cell dendritic tree and show that L versus M cone opponency arises presynaptic to the midget cell and is transmitted entirely by modulation of an excitatory conductance. L and M cone synaptic inhibition is feedforward and thus occurs in phase with excitation for both cone types. Block of GABAergic and glycinergic receptors does not attenuate or modify L versus M cone antagonism, discounting both presynaptic and postsynaptic inhibition as sources of cone opponency. In sharp contrast, enrichment of retinal pHbuffering capacity, to attenuate negative feedback from horizontal cells that sum L and M cone inputs linearly and without selectivity, completely abolished both the midget cell surround and all chromatic opponency. Thus, red-green opponency appears to arise via outer retinal horizontal cell feedback that is not cone type selective without recourse to any inner retinal L versus M cone inhibitory pathways.

Visual neurons, from retina to cortex, adapt slowly to stimulus contrast. Following a switch from high to low contrast, a neuron rapidly decreases its responsiveness and recovers over 5-20 s. Cortical adaptation arises from an intrinsic cellular mechanism: a sodium-dependent potassium conductance that causes prolonged hyperpolarization. Spiking can drive this mechanism, raising the possibility that the same mechanism exists in retinal ganglion cells. We found that adaptation in ganglion cells corresponds to a slowly recovering afterhyperpolarization (AHP), but, unlike in cortical cells, this AHP is not primarily driven by an intrinsic cellular property: spiking was not sufficient to generate adaptation. Adaptation was strongest following spatial stimuli tuned to presynaptic bipolar cells rather than the ganglion cell; it was driven by a reduced excitatory conductance, and it persisted while blocking GABA and glycine receptors, K((Ca)) channels, or mGluRs. Thus, slow adaptation arises from reduced glutamate release from presynaptic (nonspiking) bipolar cells.

No abstract

Summary In the retina, it is not well understood how visual processing depends on AMPA- and NMDA-type glutamate receptors. Here, we investigated how these receptors contribute to contrast coding in identified guinea pig ganglion cell types, in vitro. NMDA-mediated responses were negligible in ON α cells but substantial in OFF α and δ cells. OFF δ cell NMDA receptors were composed of GluN2B subunits. Using a novel deconvolution method, we determined the individual contributions of AMPA, NMDA and inhibitory currents to light responses of each cell type. OFF α and δ cells used NMDA receptors for encoding either the full contrast range (α), including near-threshold responses, or only a high range (δ). However, contrast sensitivity depended substantially on NMDA receptors only in OFF α cells. NMDA receptors contribute to visual contrast coding in a cell-type specific manner. Certain cell types generate excitatory responses using primarily AMPA receptors or disinhibition.

Visual neurons adapt to increases in stimulus contrast by reducing their response sensitivity and decreasing their integration time, a collective process known as 'contrast gain control.' In retinal ganglion cells, gain control arises at two stages: an intrinsic mechanism related to spike generation, and a synaptic mechanism in retinal pathways. Here, we tested whether gain control is expressed similarly by three synaptic pathways that converge on an OFF α/Y-type ganglion cell: excitatory inputs driven by OFF cone bipolar cells; inhibitory inputs driven by ON cone bipolar cells; and inhibitory inputs driven by rod bipolar cells. We made whole-cell recordings of membrane current in guinea pig ganglion cells in vitro. At high contrast, OFF bipolar cell-mediated excitatory input reduced gain and shortened integration time. Inhibitory input was measured by clamping voltage near 0 mV or by recording in the presence of ionotropic glutamate receptor (iGluR) antagonists to isolate the following circuit: cone → ON cone bipolar cell → AII amacrine cell → OFF ganglion cell. At high contrast, this input reduced gain with no effect on integration time. Mean luminance was reduced 1000-fold to recruit the rod bipolar pathway: rod → rod bipolar cell → AII cell → OFF ganglion cell. The spiking response, measured with loose-patch recording, adapted despite essentially no gain control in synaptic currents. Thus, cone bipolar-driven pathways adapt differently, with kinetic effects confined to the excitatory OFF pathway. The ON bipolar-mediated inhibition reduced gain at high contrast by a mechanism that did not require an iGluR. Under rod bipolar-driven conditions, ganglion cell firing showed gain control that was explained primarily by an intrinsic property.

Considerable theoretical and experimental effort has been dedicated to understanding how neural circuits detect visual motion. In primates, much is known about the cortical circuits that contribute to motion processing, but the role of the retina in this fundamental neural computation is poorly understood. Here, we used a combination of extracellular and whole-cell recording to test for motion sensitivity in the two main classes of output neurons in the primate retina-midget (parvocellular-projecting) and parasol (magnocellular-projecting) ganglion cells. We report that parasol, but not midget, ganglion cells are motion sensitive. This motion sensitivity is present in synaptic excitation and disinhibition from presynaptic bipolar cells and amacrine cells, respectively. Moreover, electrical coupling between neighboring bipolar cells and the nonlinear nature of synaptic release contribute to the observed motion sensitivity. Our findings indicate that motion computations arise far earlier in the primate visual stream than previously thought.

A retinal ganglion cell receptive field is made up of an excitatory center and an inhibitory surround. The surround has two components: one driven by horizontal cells at the first synaptic layer and one driven by amacrine cells at the second synaptic layer. Here we characterized how amacrine cells inhibit the center response of on- and off-center Y-type ganglion cells in the in vitro guinea pig retina. A high spatial frequency grating (4-5 cyc/mm), beyond the spatial resolution of horizontal cells, drifted in the ganglion cell receptive field periphery to stimulate amacrine cells. The peripheral grating suppressed the ganglion cell spiking response to a central spot. Suppression of spiking was strongest and observed most consistently in off cells. In intracellular recordings, the grating suppressed the subthreshold membrane potential in two ways: a reduced slope (gain) of the stimulus-response curve by approximately 20-30% and, in off cells, a tonic approximately 1-mV hyperpolarization. In voltage clamp, the grating increased an inhibitory conductance in all cells and simultaneously decreased an excitatory conductance in off cells. To determine whether center response inhibition was presynaptic or postsynaptic (shunting), we measured center response gain under voltage-clamp and current-clamp conditions. Under both conditions, the peripheral grating reduced center response gain similarly. This result suggests that reduced gain in the ganglion cell subthreshold center response reflects inhibition of presynaptic bipolar terminals. Thus amacrine cells suppressed ganglion cell center response gain primarily by inhibiting bipolar cell glutamate release.