Documenta Ophthalmologica

, Volume 113, Issue 3, pp 187–192 | Cite as

The influence of luminance on the multifocal ERG

Original paper



To assess the efficacy of high luminance in increasing the amplitude of the multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG). We examined 5 male and 5 female volunteers in the age of 22–52 years (median 28 years). Three different stimulus luminance levels were applied: the bright areas of the stimulus pattern were set to 150, 300 and 500 cd/m2. We recorded the potentials via DTL electrodes using the VERIS Science 4.4 system with 61 hexagons, pupils were dilated. Analysis was based on the 5 ring averages.


Across all hexagons and subjects, the response density (∼amplitude) rose by 20% when increasing the luminance by a factor of 3.3. The peak times decreased slightly with higher luminance, by less then 1.5 ms.


Combining the present results with those from two previous studies, the gain (= relative amplitude increase for relative luminance increase) is close to 0.4 over a range of 56–700 cd/m2. The stimulus luminance range suggested in the mfERG guidelines seems well chosen.


Amplitude Luminance mfERG Multifocal ERG Peak time 



Multifocal ERG


Cathode ray tube


  1. 1.
    Bach M (1998) Preparation and Montage of DTL-Electrodes. Retrieved 28.07.2006, from <>Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dawson WW, Trick GL, Litzkow CA (1979) Improved electrode for electroretinography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 18:988–991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gerth C, Garcia SM, Ma L, Keltner JL, Werner JS (2002) Multifocal electroretinogram: age-related changes for different luminance levels. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 240:202–208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hood DC, Frishman LJ, Saszik S, Viswanathan S (2002) Retinal origins of the primate multifocal ERG: implications for the human response. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 43:1673–1685PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hood DC, Odel JG, Chen CS, Winn BJ (2003) The multifocal electroretinogram. J Neuroophthalmol 23:225–235PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marmor MF, Hood DC, Keating D, Kondo M, Seeliger MW, Miyake Y (2003) Guidelines for basic multifocal electroretinography (mfERG). Doc Ophthalmol 106:105–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Raz D, Seeliger MW, Geva AB, Percicot CL, Lambrou GN, Ofri R (2002) The effect of contrast and luminance on mfERG responses in a monkey model of glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 43:2027–2035PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    R Development Core Team (2006) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved 31.07.2006, from <>Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sutter EE, Tran D (1992) The field topography of ERG components in man—I. The photopic luminance response. Vis Res 32:433–446PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ueno S, Kondo M, Niwa Y, Terasaki H, Miyake Y (2004) Luminance dependence of neural components that underlies the primate photopic electroretinogram. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 45:1033–1040PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yoshii M, Yanashima K, Wakaguri T, Sakemi F, Kikuchi Y, Suzuki S, Okisaka S (2000) A basic investigation of multifocal electroretinogram: reproducibility and effect of luminance. Jpn J Ophthalmol 44:122–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Eye DepartmentArrowe Park HospitalMerseysideUK
  2. 2.Sektion Funktionelle SehforschungUniversitäts-AugenklinikFreiburgGermany

Personalised recommendations