There are about million rods in the human retina. The cones are not as sensitive to light as the rods. However, cones are most sensitive to one of three different colors green, red or blue. Signals from the cones are sent to the brain which then translates these messages into the perception of color.
Cones, however, work only in bright light. That's why you cannot see color very well in dark places. So, the cones are used for color vision and are better suited for detecting fine details. There are about 6 million cones in the human retina. Some people cannot tell some colors from others - these people are "color blind. The fovea , shown here on the left, is the central region of the retina that provides for the most clear vision.
In the fovea, there are NO rods The cones are also packed closer together here in the fovea than in the rest of the retina. Also, blood vessels and nerve fibers go around the fovea so light has a direct path to the photoreceptors. Here is an easy way to demonstrate the sensitivity of your foveal vision. Stare at the "g" in the word "light" in middle of the following sentence:. The "g" in "light" will be clear, but words and letters on either side of the "g" will not be clear.
One part of the retina does NOT contain any photoreceptors. Topography of the layer of rods and cones in the human retina. Acta Ophthalmologica 13 Supplement 6 Stiles, W. Increment thresholds and the mechanism of colour vision. Documenta Opthalmologica 3, Wald, G. Blue blindness in the normal fovea. Journal of the Optical Society of America 57, Williams, D. Foveal tritanopia. Vision Research 21, M: b. Punctate sensitivity of foveal blue cones.
Wilmer, E. Colour sensitivity of the fovea centralis. Nature , Wooten, B. Color-vision mechanisms in the peripheral retinas of normal and dichromatic observers. Journal of General Physiology 61, You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer.
In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript. AO-SLO images 0. Voronoi analysis was performed to examine packing geometry at all locations.
Cone-to-cone spacing increased from 2. The results demonstrate the ability to image at higher retinal eccentricities than reported previously. This has clinical importance in diseases that initially affect the peripheral retina such as retinitis pigmentosa. Being the first element in the photo-transduction cascade that triggers vision, the structure and distribution of photoreceptors have long been of interest to clinicians and vision scientists.
Typically, histological studies have been conducted to examine characteristics of the photoreceptor mosaic including total cell count, density, spacing, and size, 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 as well as how these parameters vary with factors such as age 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 and gender.
However, histological analysis can also suffer from specimen preparation artifacts that may systematically skew results. Cellular level in vivo imaging of the retina can be achieved through the application of adaptive optics AO imaging techniques, which have been successfully applied to improve the resolution of a range of imaging modalities, including fundus imaging, 11 scanning laser ophthalmoscopy SLO , 12 and optical coherence tomography OCT.
Song et al 23 undertook a similar study but examined the cone density variation with age. Several studies have reported rod densities for various retinal conditions including Stargardt disease, 28 acute macular neuroretinopathy, 29 congenital stationary night blindness, 30 Oguchi disease, 30 achromatopsia, 20 and acute zonal occult outer retinopathy. Five healthy subjects denoted N1—N5 between the ages of 22 and 27 years were imaged. All subjects underwent a conventional eye examination, including slit lamp examination and ophthalmoscopy.
A bitebar was used during imaging to minimize head motion. Written informed consent was obtained after all procedures were fully explained to the subjects and prior to experimental measurements. For each location, the subject fixated on a Maltese cross target displayed on a computer monitor visible through a pellicle beam splitter.
At larger retinal eccentricities, the imaging pupil became progressively elliptical with the effective aperture varying with the cosine of the angle. Additional cylindrical trial lenses were added as the eccentricity increased to compensate for the increasing astigmatism. Due to warping in the horizontal direction caused by the sinusoidal resonant scanner motion, all frames were de-warped based on a Ronchi ruling calibration image.
Registered images were reviewed to find the focal plane where the rod mosaic appeared brightest. An automated Matlab routine identified all cells over user-selected regions of interest ROIs. The ROIs were specifically chosen over areas where the photoreceptor mosaic was well resolved and continuous without vasculature. An experienced examiner reviewed all results with the option to manually add or remove any incorrectly identified cells.
The examiner then distinguished cones from the rods based on observation of cell brightness, size, and the presence or absence of an annulus surrounding the cones the presence of which is a feature of cones in AO-SLO images.
Cone-to-cone spacing was calculated as the mean distance from a given cone to its five nearest cone neighbors, averaged over all cones in the ROI excluding those near the borders.
Although hexagonal cone packing is expected to be observed at most locations especially near the fovea , five nearest neighbors was chosen for this analysis so that regions of less dense packing would not skew the results. Rod-to-rod spacing was instead taken to be the mean distance to two nearest rod neighbors, because at more central eccentricities, where only a single ring of rods forms around each cone, rods may have only two adjacent rod neighbors.
Voronoi analysis 36 was performed using the locations of identified cones and rods to determine packing geometry in terms of number of nearest neighbors for each cell. Cone-to-all cell nearest-neighbor results were based on Voronoi analysis using the positions of all identified cells, while cone-to-cone nearest-neighbor results used only the cone positions. Voronoi analysis of rod packing is complicated by the presence of gaps when cones are excluded.
Hence, the number of rod-to-rod nearest neighbors was calculated as the number of rods within a cut-off radius of a given rod, averaged over all rods. This cut-off radius was taken to be 1. Images are displayed with logarithmic intensity scaling to enhance visualization of the rod structure. In the foveal image, all cells are cones with a center-to-center spacing of 2.
At larger eccentricities, both temporally and nasally, the cone density dropped markedly, while the rod density increased. In all images aside from the fovea , the reflected signal from cones tended to be brighter and broader than that of rods, and they were typically surrounded by a distinct dark annulus.
Images are displayed with a logarithmic intensity scale to enhance the visualization of the rod photoreceptors. These data points were excluded from the subsequent analyses. The symbols denote individual subject data with the solid black line indicating the mean. For comparison, the dashed black lines shows corresponding histological results. This was attributed, in large part, to the common phenomenon of cones exhibiting side lobes and the presence of faint intensity signals within the characteristic dark annulus, which the naive examiner often identified as separate cells.
Photoreceptor density and spacing measurements for all five subjects as a function of retinal eccentricity. Results from individual subjects are denoted by the symbols, and the solid black line shows the mean. Figure 2c and d shows results for cone and rod center-to-center spacing, respectively. Cone spacing increased from 2. Figure 3 shows the ratio of rods to cones. The ratio was zero at the fovea since no rods are present.
Rod-to-cone ratio as a function of retinal eccentricity for all subjects. Figure 4 shows retinal images and corresponding Voronoi plots at three nasal retinal eccentricities from subject N5. The color coding of each cell domain corresponds to the number of nearest neighbors of either cell type. All cells in the foveal image are cones, and therefore this demarcation was not used. At higher eccentricities, where both rods and cones are present, a more varied packing arrangement was observed. For the Voronoi plots, the color coding of the cell domains indicate the number of neighboring cells either cone or rod.
Hexagonal packing six nearest neighbors is shown in green. Figure 5 shows quantitative packing results for all subjects. Figure 5a shows the number of cone-to-all cell nearest neighbors as a function of retinal eccentricity obtained from the Voronoi analysis. Figure 5b shows the number of cone-to-cone nearest neighbors obtained from Voronoi analysis that used only the cone positions excluding rods.
From this plot it is clear that, on average, cones are predominantly packed hexagonally at all retinal locations examined with slightly larger variation at larger eccentricities.
Figure 5c shows the number of rod-to-rod nearest neighbors. The number of rod nearest neighbors was slightly higher in the TR than in the NR, plateauing at 3. Quantitative cone and rod nearest neighbor results. The solid black line shows the mean. Although this is not the first study using an AO-SLO to characterize photoreceptor packing, the range of eccentricities imaged has been doubled compared with prior work for both cones and rods.
0コメント