4.6 Article

Cone-Rod Dependence in the Rat Retina: Variation with the Rate of Rod Damage

期刊

INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE
卷 50, 期 6, 页码 3017-3023

出版社

ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.08-3004

关键词

-

资金

  1. Retina Australia
  2. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia
  3. Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE. To assess the effect of accelerated rod damage on the integrity of cones in the rat retina. METHODS. Rhodopsin-mutant P23H-3 and Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats were raised in scotopic ambient conditions (12 hours dark, 12 hours 5 lux) and then exposed to photopic conditions (12 hours dark, 12 hours 300 lux). Rods and cones were assessed for cell death, outer segment (OS) morphology, and electroretinogram (ERG) responses. RESULTS. Cones in the P23H-retina were affected rapidly by photopic exposure. Exposure for 2 days caused 50% reductions in LM- and S-cone OS length and cone ERG responses, associated with and preceded by reductions in rod OS length and ERG responses. Although 2 days' exposure increased the rate of rod death, outer nuclear layer thinning was minimal, and no evidence of cone death was detected. In the SD retina, the same photopic exposure had no measurable effects on death rates, OS length, or ERG responses in either rods or cones. Longer (7 days) photopic exposure reduced cone and rod OS length and ERG responses in SD, as well as P23H-3 retinas, but less severely than in the P23H-3 strain. CONCLUSIONS. Cones are damaged rapidly in the P23H-3 retina when rod damage is accelerated by raised ambient illumination. This close dependence of cone integrity on rod integrity contrasts with the life-long persistence of cone function in the scotopic reared P23H-3 rat. In humans suffering comparable photoreceptor dystrophies, the maintenance of steady, low ambient light may, by minimizing acute rod damage, optimize the function of surviving cones. (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50:3017-3023) DOI:10.1167/iovs.08-3004

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据