Analysis of waveform and amplitude of mouse rod and cone flash responses

Origin of Discrete and Continuous Dark Noise in Rod Photoreceptors

The detection of a single photon by a rod photoreceptor is limited by two sources of physiological noise, called discrete and continuous noise. Discrete noise occurs as intermittent current deflections with a waveform very similar to that of the single-photon response to real light and is thought to be produced by spontaneous activation of rhodopsin. Continuous noise occurs as random and continuous fluctuations in outer-segment current and is usually attributed to some intermediate in the phototransduction cascade. To confirm the origin of these noise sources, we have recorded from retinas of mouse lines with rods having reduced levels of rhodopsin, transducin, or phosphodiesterase. We show that the rate of discrete noise is diminished in proportion to the decrease in rhodopsin concentration, and that continuous noise is independent of transducin concentration but clearly elevated when the level of phosphodiesterase is reduced. Our experiments provide new molecular evidence that discrete noise is indeed produced by rhodopsin itself, and that continuous noise is generated by spontaneous activation of phosphodiesterase resulting in random fluctuations in outer-segment current.

Analysis of dim-light responses in rod and cone photoreceptors with altered calcium kinetics

Rod and cone photoreceptors in the retina of vertebrates are the primary sensory neurons underlying vision. They convert light into an electrical current using a signal transduction pathway that depends on Ca[Formula: see text] feedback. It is known that manipulating the Ca[Formula: see text] kinetics affects the response shape and the photoreceptor sensitivity, but a precise quantification of these effects remains unclear. We have approached this task in mouse retina by combining numerical simulations with mathematical analysis. We consider a parsimonious phototransduction model that incorporates negative Ca[Formula: see text] feedback onto the synthesis of cyclic GMP, and fast buffering reactions to alter the Ca[Formula: see text] kinetics. We derive analytic results for the photoreceptor functioning in sufficiently dim light conditions depending on the photoreceptor type. We exploit these results to obtain conceptual and quantitative insight into how response waveform and amplitude depend on the underlying biophysical processes and the Ca[Formula: see text] feedback. With a low amount of buffering, the Ca[Formula: see text] concentration changes in proportion to the current, and responses to flashes of light are monophasic. With more buffering, the change in the Ca[Formula: see text] concentration becomes delayed with respect to the current, which gives rise to a damped oscillation and a biphasic waveform. This shows that biphasic responses are not necessarily a manifestation of slow buffering reactions. We obtain analytic approximations for the peak flash amplitude as a function of the light intensity, which shows how the photoreceptor sensitivity depends on the biophysical parameters. Finally, we study how changing the extracellular Ca[Formula: see text] concentration affects the response.

Molecular basis of rod and cone differences

In the vertebrate retina, rods and cones both detect light, but they are different in functional aspects such as light sensitivity and time resolution, for example, and in some of cell biological aspects. For functional aspects, both photoreceptors are known to share a common mechanism, phototransduction cascade, consisting of a series of enzyme reactions to convert a photon-capture signal to an electrical signal. To understand the mechanisms of the functional differences between rods and cones at the molecular level, we compared biochemically each of the reactions in the phototransduction cascade between rods and cones using the cells isolated and purified from carp retina. Although proteins in the cascade are functionally similar between rods and cones, their activities together with their expression levels are mostly different between these photoreceptors. In general, reactions to generate a response are slightly less effective, as a total, in cones than in rods, but each of the reactions for termination and recovery of a response are much more effective in cones. These findings explain lower light sensitivity and briefer light responses in cones than in rods. In addition, our considerations suggest that a Ca²⁺-binding protein, S-modulin or recoverin, has a currently unnoticed role in shaping light responses. With comparison of the expression levels of proteins and/or mRNAs using purified cells, several proteins were found to be specifically or predominantly expressed in cones. These proteins would be of interest for future studies on the difference between rods and cones.