Evidence for an impact of melanopsin activation on unique white perception
Open accessAbstract
Current models of human color vision only consider cone inputs at photopic light levels, yet it is unclear whether the recently discovered melanopsin-expressing intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) contribute to color perception. Using a lab-made five-primary photostimulator that can independently control the stimulations of rods, cones, and ipRGCs in human retina, we determined the observer's unique white perception, an equilibrium point for signals arising from the opponent mechanisms of color vision, under different levels of melanopsin activation. We found changing melanopsin activation levels shifts the equilibrium point in the chromatic pathways. Our results suggest potential evidence for an impact of melanopsin activation on unique white perception and the existing color vision model for the periphery may need to be revised by incorporating melanopsin signaling.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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?
There is now converging evidence that melanopsin signals reach the primary visual cortex (V1), where they may contribute to and modulate visual perception.
“There is now converging evidence that melanopsin signals reach the primary visual cortex (V1) [82], where they may contribute to and modulate our visual perception [20, 25, 109].”
From Effects of light on human circadian rhythms, sleep and mood (2019) · cites this paper as [25]
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 51
- Authors
- Cao, D., Chang, A., & Gai, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Chicago (US)
- Corresponding author
- Cao, Dingcai
- Chang, Adam
- Gai, Shaoyan
- ORCID
- Cao, Dingcai
- Venue
- Journal of the Optical Society of America A
- Publisher
- Optica Publishing Group
- Published
- 2018-03-26
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- B287
- ISSN
- 1084-7529 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-8532
- PMC
- PMC6223255
- OpenAlex
- W2790230074
- Cited by
- 51
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8
- FWCI
- 3.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- europepmc.org
- Locations
- Journal of the Optical Society of America A (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) (R01 AA023839)
- Cless Family Foundation
- National Eye Institute (NEI) (P30-EY01792)
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (61628304)
- Research to Prevent Blindness (RPB)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Color Science and Applications
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Circadian rhythm and melatonin
- Keywords
- melanopsin, intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells, color vision, peripheral vision, rod photoreceptors, cone photoreceptors
- MeSH terms
- Melanopsin, Adult, Color Perception, Humans, Light, Male, Middle Aged, Photic Stimulation, Retinal Ganglion Cells, Rod Opsins, 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
