4.7 Article

Structural and Functional Change in Albino Rat Retina Induced by Various Visible Light Wavelengths

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23010309

关键词

retinal degeneration; visible light; electroretinograms; outer nuclear layer

资金

  1. National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Japan [NP23-03]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study investigated the effects of visible light on the retina and found that the damage depends on the wavelength and energy level. Shorter wavelengths of light caused more significant harm to the albino rat's retina.
The effects of visible light, from short to long wavelengths, on the retina were investigated functionally and histologically. The left eyes of Sprague-Dawley albino rats (6-weeks old, n = 6 for each wavelength) were exposed to seven narrow-band wavelengths (central wavelengths, 421, 441, 459, 501, 541, 581, and 615 nm) with bandwidths of 16 to 29 nm (half bandwidth, +/- 8-14.5 nm) using a xenon lamp source with bandpass filters at the retinal radiant exposures of 340 and 680 J/cm(2). The right unexposed eyes served as controls. Seven days after exposure, flash electroretinograms (ERGs) were recorded, and the outer nuclear layer (ONL) thickness was measured. Compared to the unexposed eyes, significant reductions in the a- and b-wave ERG amplitudes were seen in eyes exposed to 460-nm or shorter wavelengths of light. The ONL thickness near the optic nerve head also tended to decrease with exposure to shorter wavelengths. The decreased ERG amplitudes and ONL thicknesses were most prominent in eyes exposed to 420-nm light at both radiant exposures. When the wavelengths were the same, the higher the amount of radiant exposure and the stronger the damage. Compared to the unexposed eyes, the a- and b-waves did not decrease significantly in eyes exposed to 500-nm or longer wavelength light. The results indicate that the retinal damage induced by visible light observed in albino rats depends on the wavelength and energy level of the exposed light.

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

4.7
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