Photoreceptor Sensitivity and Kinetics in Light Adaptation
S. Nikonov,T. Lamb,E. Pugh
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1085/JGP.117.4.365
2001-04-01
The Journal of General Physiology
Abstract:In the preceding letter (Pepperberg, 2001), Dr. David Pepperberg offers an alternative interpretation to that given in our recent paper (Nikonov et al., 2000) for the nature of the changes underlying light adaptation in rod photoreceptors. We do not agree with Dr. Pepper-berg's interpretation, and we set out our reasons below. From the outset, we should make it clear that we and Dr. Pepperberg are measuring different phenomena: our analysis concentrated primarily on the rising phase of the response (both to dim and bright flashes), whereas Dr. Pepperberg's analysis concentrates on the recovery phase of the response to bright flashes. This difference has important consequences for the interpretation of mechanisms. Dr. Pepperberg refers to the " relative gain " g of trans-duction, estimated from the time during which the photoreceptor remains in saturation after exposure to an intense flash of light. In our view, the parameter so derived conflates factors that apply separately to the rise of the response and to the recovery of the response. Thus, when Pepperberg's g is found to be altered , it is not clear whether the amplification of the activation steps in the cascade has changed, or whether the lifetime of one or more active intermediates has changed (or both). For this reason, we sought, in our experiments and analysis, to separate the two possibilities , by concentrating on the rising phase. Furthermore , we concentrated for the most part on small-signal responses, rather than on saturating responses, because of our view that the adaptational state of the cell is more likely to be seriously changed by saturating responses than by dim flashes. Our experimental measurements showed that (when expressed in fractional terms) the early rising phase of the response is invariant under different conditions of light adaptation. Accordingly, our experiments showed that the " amplification constant " , A , (Lamb and Pugh, 1992; Pugh and Lamb, 1993) of transduction is unaltered during light adaptation, and that therefore there is no detectable change in the efficacy of the activation steps of the cascade, at least at early times in the response. However, as numerous studies have shown over the years, the flash sensitivity (measured at the peak of the response) declines during light adaptation, even after correction for " response compression. " This reduction occurs because, although the fractional response initially rises along an invariant time course, it reaches peak earlier and, therefore, …