Biology subjects

Haggerty, E. B.

Publications and source records attributed to Haggerty, E. B..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2021

Melanopic stimulation does not affect psychophysical threshold sensitivity for luminance flicker

In addition to the cone photoreceptors the retina contains intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs). These cells express the photopigment melanopsin and are known to be involved in reflexive visual functions such as pupil response and photo-entrainment of the circadian rhythm. It is possible that the ipRGCs contribute to conscious visual perception, either by providing an independent signal to the geniculo-striate pathway, or by interacting with and thus modifying signals arising from "classical" retinal ganglion cells that combine and contrast cone input. Here, we tested for the existence of an interaction by asking if a 350% change in melanopsin stimulation alters psychophysical sensitivity for the detection of luminance flicker. In Experiment 1, we tested for a change in the threshold for detecting luminance flicker in three participants after they adapted to backgrounds with different degrees of tonic melanopsin stimulation. In Experiments 2 and 3, this test was repeated, but now for luminance flicker presented on a transient pedestal of melanopsin stimulation. Across the three experiments, no effect of melanopsin stimulation upon threshold flicker sensitivity was found. Our results suggest that even large changes in melanopsin stimulation do not affect near-threshold, cone-mediated visual perception.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2020

Enhanced reflexive eye closure is mediated by ipRGC signals and is specific to migraine with visual aura

ObjectiveTo assess the contribution of the melanopsin-containing, intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) and the cones to reflexive eye closure as an implicit measure of interictal photophobia in migraine. MethodsWe studied twenty participants in each of three groups: headache-free (HAf) controls, migraine without aura (MwoA), and migraine with visual aura (MwA). Participants viewed spectral pulses that selectively targeted melanopsin, the cones, or their combination while we recorded orbicularis oculi electromyography (OO-EMG) and blinking rate. ResultsTime course analysis of OO-EMG demonstrated that reflexive eye closure was tightly coupled to the spectral pulses. Compared to both the MwoA and HAf control groups, the MwA group had enhanced OO-EMG and blinking activity in response to melanopsin and cone stimulation in combination and in isolation. This response scaled with the contrast of the stimulus. ConclusionsOur findings suggest that ipRGC signals, whether elicited by melanopsin stimulation or from presumed extrinsic cone input, provide the afferent input for light-induced reflexive eye closure in a photophobic state. Participants with migraine and visual aura had a distinctly different response to visual stimulation as compared to the other two groups. This is in contrast to prior findings in this same cohort in whom higher explicit ratings of visual discomfort were found for both MwA and MwoA as compared to controls. Such a dissociation suggests distinct pathophysiology in forms of migraine, interacting with separate neural pathways by which ipRGC signals elicit implicit and explicit signs of visual discomfort.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2020

Selective amplification of ipRGC signals accounts for interictal photophobia in migraine

Second only to headache, photophobia is the most debilitating symptom reported by people with migraine. While the melanopsin-containing, intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) are thought to play a role, how cone and melanopsin signals are integrated in this pathway to produce visual discomfort is poorly understood. We studied 60 people: 20 without headache and 20 each with interictal photophobia from migraine with or without aura. Participants viewed pulses of spectral change that selectively targeted melanopsin, the cones, or both, and rated the degree of visual discomfort produced by these stimuli while we also recorded pupil responses. We examined the data within a model that describes how cone and melanopsin signals are weighted and combined at the level of the retina, and how this combined signal is transformed into a rating of discomfort or pupil response. Our results indicate that people with migraine do not differ from headache-free controls in the manner in which melanopsin and cone signals are combined. Instead, people with migraine demonstrate an amplification of integrated ipRGC signals for discomfort. This effect of migraine is selective for ratings of visual discomfort, in that an amplification of pupil responses was not seen in the migraine group, nor were group differences found in surveys of other behaviors putatively linked to ipRGC function (chronotype, seasonal sensitivity, presence of a photic sneeze reflex). By revealing a dissociation in the amplification of discomfort versus pupil response, our findings suggest a post-retinal alteration in processing of ipRGC signals for photophobia in migraine. SignificanceThe melanopsin-containing, intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) may contribute to photophobia in migraine. We measured visual discomfort and pupil responses to cone and melanopsin stimulation--the photoreceptor inputs to the ipRGCs--in people with and without migraine. We find that people with migraine do not differ from those without headaches in how cone and melanopsin signals are weighted and combined to produce visual discomfort. Instead, migraine is associated with an amplification of ipRGC signals for discomfort. This effect of migraine upon ipRGC signals is limited to photophobia, as we did not find an enhancement of pupil responses or a change in other behaviors linked to ipRGC function. Our findings suggest a post-retinal amplification of ipRGC signals for photophobia in migraine.

neuroscience↗