Cited by 15Retinal Development and DisordersPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchVisual perception and processing mechanisms

Sensitivity of mammalian cone photoreceptors to infrared light

Open access
Vinberg, Frans, Palczewska, Grazyna, Zhang, Jianye, Komar, Katarzyna, Wojtkowski, Maciej, Kefalov, Vladimir J., Palczewski, Krzysztof·2019·Neuroscience

Abstract

Two-photon vision arises from the perception of pulsed infrared (IR) laser light as color corresponding to approximately half of the laser wavelength. The physical process responsible for two-photon vision in rods has been delineated and verified experimentally only recently. Here, we sought to determine whether IR light can also be perceived by mammalian cone photoreceptors via a similar activation mechanism. To investigate selectively mammalian cone signaling in mice, we used animals with disabled rod signal transduction. We found that, contrary to the expected progressive sensitivity decrease based on the one-photon cone visual pigment spectral template, the sensitivity of mouse cone photoreceptors decreases only up to 800 nm and then increases at 900 nm and 1000 nm. Similarly, in experiments with the parafoveal region of macaque retinas, we found that the spectral sensitivity of primate cones diverged above the predicted one-photon spectral sensitivity template beyond 800 nm. In both cases, efficient detection of IR light was dependent on minimizing the dispersion of the ultrashort light pulses, indicating a non-linear two-photon activation process. Together, our studies demonstrate that mammalian cones can be activated by near IR light by a nonlinear two-photon excitation. Our results pave the way for the creation of a two-photon IR-based ophthalmoscope for the simultaneous imaging and functional testing of human retinas as a novel tool for the diagnosis and treatment of a wide range of visual disorders.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2019.07.047

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The ability of red light to induce dopamine release at intensities as low as 0.1 μW/cm2 is consistent with research that rodents are better at perceiving red wavelengths than is commonly acknowledged.

    “The ability of red light to induce dopamine release at intensities as low as 0.1 μW/cm2 is consistent with research that rodents are better at perceiving red wavelengths than is commonly acknowledged (Danskin et al., 2015; Nikbakht and Diamond, 2021; Vinberg et al., 2019).”

    From Ventral striatum dopamine release encodes unique properties of visual stimuli in mice (2023) · cites this paper as Vinberg et al., 2019

    The Results (page unavailable) show that isolated mouse cones respond to far-red and near-infrared stimulation more strongly than a one-photon model predicts. This supports the narrower point that mouse photoreceptors are sensitive to those wavelengths, but the paper does not establish that rodents perceive red light better in ordinary conditions: its longer-wavelength responses involved pulsed-laser stimulation of isolated retinas. The 0.1 μW/cm² dopamine result is the citing authors’ finding, not a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 35 · Cited by 15

Authors
Vinberg, F., Palczewska, G., Zhang, J., Komar, K., Wojtkowski, M., Kefalov, V. J., & Palczewski, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Utah (US)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • Nicolaus Copernicus University (PL)
  • Institute of Physical Chemistry (PL)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Palczewski, Krzysztof
Venue
Neuroscience
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-09
Volume
416
Pages
100-108
ISSN
0306-4522 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2968826467
Cited by
15
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2
FWCI
0.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Retinal Development and Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Photoreceptor and optogenetics research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
cone photoreceptors, two-photon excitation, spectral sensitivity, mouse retina, macaque retina, ultrashort light pulses, retinal imaging
MeSH terms
Animals, Light, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Retina, Vision, Ocular, Signal Transduction, Photons, Retinal Rod Photoreceptor Cells, Retinal Cone Photoreceptor Cells

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review