Contrast Sensitivity

While recent work has revealed how different inhibitory interneurons influence responses of cortical neurons to sensory stimuli, little is known about their distinct contributions to sensory perception. Here, we optogenetically activated different genetically defined interneurons [parvalbumin (PV), somatostatin (SST), vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP)] in visual cortex (V1) of mice working at threshold in a contrast increment detection task. The visual stimulus was paired with optogenetic stimulation to assess how enhancing V1 inhibitory neuron activity during visual processing altered task performance. PV or SST activation impaired, while VIP stimulation improved, contrast increment detection. The impairment produced by PV or SST activation persisted over several weeks of testing. In contrast, mice learned to reliably detect VIP activation in the absence of any natural visual stimulus. Thus, different inhibitory signals make distinct contributions to visual contrast perception.

Background/objectiveTo evaluate the visual performance of a purely refractive extended depth of focus (EDF) intraocular lens (IOL).Subjects/methodsA prospective, multi-center, randomized, subject/evaluator-masked study. Subjects were bilaterally implanted with the EDF test (Model ZEN00V, TECNIS PureSee™ IOL, N = 60) or an enhanced monofocal control (Model ICB00, TECNIS Eyhance™ IOL, N = 57) IOL. Monocular corrected distance (CDVA), intermediate (DCIVA), near acuities (DCNVA) and patient reported visual symptoms were evaluated at the 6-month visit. Monocular mesopic contrast sensitivity (CS) and depth of focus (DOF) testing were assessed at 3 months.ResultsCDVA (Mean ± SD) was -0.06 ± 0.08 for test and -0.05 ± 0.08 logMAR for control groups. DCIVA was 0.13 ± 0.08 for test and 0.18 ± 0.14 logMAR for control groups (p = 0.0127). DCNVA was 0.37 ± 0.10 for test and 0.43 ± 0.16 logMAR for control groups (p = 0.0137). Test lens was statistically superior for intermediate and near. Overall, 91.7% (halos), 95.0% (starbursts) and 95.0% (glare) of test lens patients reported that they did not experience, were not bothered, or were slightly bothered by specific visual symptoms, compared to 98.2%, 100% and 96.5% in the control group. The DOF range over which monocular visual acuity was 0.20 logMAR or better was -1.6 D for the test lens. Mesopic CS was comparable between both groups, falling within 0.11 log units for all measured cycles per degree with and without glare.ConclusionThe EDF IOL demonstrated extended range of vision and statistically superior intermediate and near performance compared to the monofocal IOL. Distance visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and dysphotopsia profile were similar to the monofocal IOL.

Human visual performance changes dramatically both across (eccentricity) and around (polar angle) the visual field. Performance is better at the fovea, decreases with eccentricity, and is better along the horizontal than vertical meridian and along the lower than the upper vertical meridian. However, all neurophysiological and virtually all behavioral studies of cortical magnification have investigated eccentricity effects without considering polar angle. Most performance differences due to eccentricity are eliminated when stimulus size is cortically magnified (M-scaled) to equate the size of its cortical representation in primary visual cortex (V1). But does cortical magnification underlie performance differences around the visual field? Here, to assess contrast sensitivity, human adult observers performed an orientation discrimination task with constant stimulus size at different locations as well as when stimulus size was M-scaled according to stimulus eccentricity and polar angle location. We found that although M-scaling stimulus size eliminates differences across eccentricity, it does not eliminate differences around the polar angle. This finding indicates that limits in contrast sensitivity across eccentricity and around polar angle of the visual field are mediated by different anatomical and computational constraints.

Exogenous attention is a rapid, involuntary mechanism that automatically reallocates processing resources toward salient stimuli. It enhances visual sensitivity in the vicinity of the salient stimulus, both in extrafoveal regions and within the high-acuity foveola. While the spatial frequencies (SFs) modulated by exogenous attention in extrafoveal vision are well characterized, it remains unknown how this mechanism operates within the foveola, which can resolve SFs up to 30 cycles per degree (CPD). Here, we examined which SFs were enhanced by fine-grained deployments of exogenous attention within this highest-acuity region of the visual field. Using high-precision eye-tracking to precisely localize gaze during attentional allocation, we found that exogenous attention at the foveal scale selectively enhances contrast sensitivity for low- to mid-range SFs (4-8 CPD), with no significant benefits for higher SFs (12-20 CPD). In contrast, attention-related benefits on asymptotic performance at the highest contrast were observed across a wide range of SFs. These results indicate that, despite the high-resolution capacity of the foveola, exogenous attention remains an inflexible mechanism that, even at this scale, selectively enhances contrast gain for lower SFs-mirroring its behavior in extrafoveal vision.