PreprintCited by 30Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringRetinal Development and DisordersVisual perception and processing mechanisms

High-fidelity reproduction of visual signals by electrical stimulation in the central primate retina

Open access
Gogliettino, Alex R., Madugula, Sasidhar S., Grosberg, Lauren E., Vilkhu, Ramandeep S., Brown, Jeff, Nguyen, Huy, Kling, Alexandra, Hottowy, Paweł +4 more·2022·bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)

Abstract

Abstract Electrical stimulation of retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) with electronic implants provides rudimentary artificial vision to people blinded by retinal degeneration. However, current devices stimulate indiscriminately and therefore cannot reproduce the intricate neural code of the retina. Recent work has demonstrated more precise activation of RGCs using focal electrical stimulation with multi-electrode arrays in the peripheral macaque retina, but it is unclear how effective this can be in the central retina, which is required for high-resolution vision. This work probes the neural code and effectiveness of focal epiretinal stimulation in the central macaque retina, using large-scale electrical recording and stimulation ex vivo . The functional organization, light response properties, and electrical properties of the major RGC types in the central retina were mostly similar to the peripheral retina, with some notable differences in density, kinetics, linearity, spiking statistics and correlations. The major RGC types could be distinguished by their intrinsic electrical properties. Electrical stimulation targeting parasol cells revealed similar activation thresholds and reduced axon bundle activation in the central retina, but lower stimulation selectivity. Quantitative evaluation of the potential for image reconstruction from electrically-evoked parasol cell signals revealed higher overall expected image quality in the central retina. An exploration of inadvertent midget cell activation suggested that it could contribute high spatial frequency noise to the visual signal carried by parasol cells. These results support the possibility of reproducing high-acuity visual signals in the central retina with an epiretinal implant. Significance Statement Artificial restoration of vision with retinal implants is a major treatment for blindness. However, present-day implants do not provide high-resolution visual perception, in part because they do not reproduce the natural neural code of the retina. Here we demonstrate the level of visual signal reproduction that is possible with a future implant by examining how accurately responses to electrical stimulation of parasol retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) can convey visual signals. Although the precision of electrical stimulation in the central retina was diminished relative to the peripheral retina, the quality of expected visual signal reconstruction in parasol cells was greater. These findings suggest that visual signals could be restored with high fidelity in the central retina using a future retinal implant.

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 · 10.1101/2022.05.24.493162

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • One solution to improve resolution in epiretinal stimulation would be to selectively activate individual RGCs by establishing a one-to-one connection between RGCs and electrodes.

    “One solution would be to selectively activate individual RGCs by establishing a one-to-one connection between RGCs and electrodes [137].”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Dacey, D.M. (2004). Origins of perception: retinal ganglion cell diversity and the creation of parallel visual pathways. In The Cognitive Neurosciences, M.S. Gazzaniga, ed. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 281-301.
  2. Kingma, D.P., and Ba, J. (2014). Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization. arXiv.
  3. Muratore, D.G., and Chichilnisky, E.J. (2020). Artificial Retina: A Future Cellular-Resolution Brain-Machine Interface. In NANO-CHIPS 2030: On-Chip AI for an Efficient Data-Driven World, B. Murmann, and B. Hoefflinger, eds. (Cham: Springer International Publishing), pp. 443-465.
  4. Pachitariu, M., Steinmetz, N., Kadir, S., Carandini, M., and Harris, K. (2016). Fast and accurate spike sorting of high-channel count probes with KiloSort. In NIPS Proceedings, (Neural Information Systems Foundation, Inc.),.
  5. Parthasarathy, N., Batty, E., Falcon, W., Rutten, T., Rajpal, M., Chichilnisky, E.J., and Paninski, L. (2017). Neural Networks for Efficient Bayesian Decoding of Natural Images from Retinal Neurons. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, I.
  6. Zhou, D.D., Dorn, J.D., and Greenberg, R.J. (2013). The Argus® II retinal prosthesis system: An overview. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo Workshops (ICMEW), pp. 1-6.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gogliettino, A. R., Madugula, S. S., Grosberg, L. E., Vilkhu, R. S., Brown, J., Nguyen, H., Kling, A., Hottowy, P., Dąbrowski, W., Sher, A., Litke, A. M., & Chichilnisky, E. J.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • AGH University of Krakow (PL)
  • University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
Corresponding author
Gogliettino, Alex R.
Venue
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2022-05-25
Volume
43
Issue
25
Pages
4625-4641
ISSN
0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4376604073
Cited by
30
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2
FWCI
3.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Research to Prevent Blindness
  • Fondation Bertarelli
  • Narodowe Centrum Nauki (DEC-2013/10/M/NZ4/00268)
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Stanford Bio-X
  • Wu Tsai Neurosciences Institute, Stanford University
  • National Institute of Mental Health (T32MH020016)
  • National Eye Institute (EY019005, P30EY019005, R01EY032900, NEI R01, F30-EY030776-03, EY021271, F30EY030776, F31EY033636, R01EY021271, R01EY029247)
  • Division of Undergraduate Education
  • California National Primate Research Center
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Retinal Development and Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
retinal prosthesis, epiretinal stimulation, retinal ganglion cells, parasol cells, midget cells, central retina, macaque retina, image reconstruction, neural code, retinal degeneration, artificial vision
MeSH terms
Animals, Electric Stimulation, Macaca, Photic Stimulation, Retina, Retinal Ganglion Cells, Prostheses and Implants, Visual Prosthesis

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