The bulletin of mathematical biophysics

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 125–139 | Cite as

On visual adaptation: II. The electroretinogram and the bipolar cells

  • Harold White
Article
  • 35 Downloads

Abstract

First a model for theb-wave of the electroretinogram is given. The essential part of the model is the diffusion into the rod-bipolar synapse of a transmitter substance, followed by the induction of an inhibitor. Making use of this model, adaptation to an illumination too weak to cause of significant decrease in the concentration of visual pigment is interpreted as due to a decreased effectiveness of the rod impulse in exciting the bipolar cell. The disparity between threshold changes for very small test spots and for relatively large spots is explained simply, without invoking any additional physiological mechanisms.

Keywords

Bipolar Cell Visual Pigment Test Spot Threshold Change Spatial Summation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature

  1. Adrian, E. D. 1945. “The Electrical Response of the Human Eye.”J. Physiol.,104, 84–104.Google Scholar
  2. Barlow, H. B., R. FitzHugh, and S. W. Kuffler. 1957. “Changes of Organization in the Receptor Fields of the Cat's Retina During Dark Adaptation.”J. Physiol.,137, 338–354.Google Scholar
  3. Bouman, M. A. 1952. “Mechanisms in Peripheral Dark Adaptation.”J. Opt. Soc. Amer.,42, 941–950.Google Scholar
  4. — 1961. InSensory Communication, W. Rosenblith, ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  5. Brindley, G. S. 1960.Physiology of the Retina and Visual Pathway. London: Edward Arnold (Publishers) Ltd.Google Scholar
  6. Burns, B. D. 1958.The Mammalian Cerebral Cortex. London: Edward Arnold (Publishers) Ltd.Google Scholar
  7. Crawford, B. H. 1947. “Visual Adaptation in Relation to Brief Conditioning Stimuli.”Proc. Roy. Soc. London B,134, 283–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gebhart, J. W. 1953. “Motokawa's Studies on Electrical Excitation of the Human Eye.”Psychol. Bull. 50, 73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Granit, R. 1955.Receptors and Sensory Perception. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Greene, P. H. 1958. Factors in Visual Acuity. ASTIA Doc. No. AD 158 397. Washington: Air Force Office of Scientific Research.Google Scholar
  11. Johnson, E. P. 1958. “The Character of the B-Wave in the Human Electroretinogram.”AMA Arch. Ophthal.,60, 565–591.Google Scholar
  12. Lamb, H. 1945.Hydrodynamics. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  13. Landahl, H. D. 1953. “An Approximate Method for the Solution of Diffusion and Related Problems.”Bull. Math. Biophysics,15, 49–61.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pearson, E. S. and H. O. Hartley. 1954.Biometrika Tables for Statisticians, Vol. I. Cambridge: University Press.MATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Polyak, S. L. 1957.The Vertebrate Visual System. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  16. Rashevsky, N. 1960.Mathematical Biophysics, 3rd ed., Vol. II. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.MATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Rose, A. 1948. “The Sensitivity Performance of the Human Eye on an Absolute Scale.”J. Opt. Soc. Amer.,38, 196–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rushton, W. A. H. 1956. “The Rhodopsin Density in the Human Rods.”J. Physiol.,134, 30–46.Google Scholar
  19. — 1961. InLight and Life, W. D. McElroy and B. Glass, eds. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
  20. Wald, G. 1944. “On the Mechanism of the Visual Threshold and Visual Adaptation.”Science,119, 887–892.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© University of Chicago 1963

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harold White
    • 1
  1. 1.Committee on Mathematical BiologyThe University of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations