Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T12:51:51.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of foveal tritanopia on reaction times to chromatic stimuli

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2005

N.R.A. PARRY ,
S. PLAINIS ,
I.J. MURRAY  and
D.J. McKEEFRY
N.R.A. PARRY
Affiliation:
Vision Science Centre, Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, UK
S. PLAINIS
Affiliation:
VEIC, School of Medicine, University of Crete, Greece
I.J. MURRAY
Affiliation:
Visual Sciences Lab, Optometry & Neuroscience, UMIST, Manchester, UK
D.J. McKEEFRY
Affiliation:
Optometry, University of Bradford, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

To investigate the effect of foveal inhomogeneities on sensitivity to chromatic stimuli, we measured simple reaction times (RTs) and detection thresholds to temporally and spatially blurred isoluminant stimuli at retinal eccentricities from 0 deg to 8 deg. Three color-normal subjects participated. Contrast gain was derived from the slope of the RT versus contrast function. With a Gaussian spatial distribution (S.D. = 0.5 deg) and modulation between white (CIE x,y,L = 0.31, 0.316, 12.5 cd.m−2) and blue (MBDKL 90 deg), gain was maximal at about 2-deg eccentricity and declined by approximately 1 log unit towards the center and the periphery. The red (0 deg) and green (180 deg) cardinal axes showed maximum gain in the center, whilst the yellow (270 deg) data were intermediate. Although the spatial extent of the Gaussian spot was much larger than the S-cone free zone, we wished to determine whether foveal tritanopia was responsible for the marked drop in sensitivity to the 90-deg stimulus. To align the color vector along a tritan line, we used a smaller disk (0.3 deg) with a blurred edge and measured detection threshold, rotating the vector until minimum central sensitivity was obtained. Other workers have used transient tritanopia or minimally distinct border to similar effect. By repeating this at different locations in color space, a group of vectors were obtained. These converged near to the S-cone co-punctal point, evidence that they lay along tritan confusion lines. These threshold findings were then confirmed using the RT-derived contrast gain function. The tritan vectors were less pronounced as stimulus size increased. With the vector optimized to produce foveal tritanopia, the RT gain versus eccentricity functions for the 90-deg and 270-deg stimuli both fell markedly in the center and periphery, and sensitivity peaked at about 3-deg eccentricity. There are some similarities between these findings and the underlying photoreceptor distributions. As a result, there is a greater difference in gain between red–green and blue–yellow systems in the center than in the near periphery. We conclude that the RT versus contrast function is a sensitive index of foveal opponency.

Keywords

Reaction timeColor opponencyFoveal tritanopiaContrast thresholdContrast gain
Type
Research Article
Information
Visual Neuroscience , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , May 2004 , pp. 237 - 242
Copyright
© 2004 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, S.J., Mullen, K.T., & Hess, R.F. (1991). Human peripheral spatial resolution for achromatic and chromatic stimuli—limits imposed by optical and retinal factors. Journal of Physiology (London) 442, 47–64.Google Scholar
Calkins, D.J. (2001). Seeing with S cones. Progress in Retinal and Eye Research 20, 255–287.Google Scholar
Castano, J.A. & Sperling, H.G. (1982). Sensitivity of the blue-sensitive cones across the central retina. Vision Research 22, 661–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curcio, C.A., Sloan, K.R., Kalina, R.E., & Hendrickson, A.E. (1990). Human photoreceptor topography. Journal of Comparative Neurology 292, 497–523.Google Scholar
Curcio, C.A., Allen, K.A., Sloan, K.R., Lerea, C.L., Hurley, J.B., Klock, I.B., & Milam, A.H. (1991). Distribution and morphology of human cone photoreceptors stained with anti-blue opsin. Journal of Comparative Neurology 312, 610–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derrington, A.M., Krauskopf, J., & Lennie, P. (1984). Chromatic mechanisms in lateral geniculate nucleus of macaque. Journal of Physiology (London) 357, 241–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golz, J. & MacLeod, D.I.A. (2003). Colorimetry for CRT displays. Journal of the Optical Society of America A 20, 769–781.Google Scholar
MacLeod, D.I.A. & Boynton, R.M. (1979). Chromaticity diagram showing cone excitation by stimuli of equal luminance. Journal of the Optical Society of America 69, 1183Google Scholar
McKeefry, D.J., Parry, N.R.A., & Murray, I.J. (2003). Simple reaction times in colour space: The influence of chromaticity, contrast and cone opponency. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science 44, 2267–2276.Google Scholar
Metha, A.B. & Lennie, P. (2001). Transmission of spatial information in S-cone pathways. Visual Neuroscience 18, 961–972.Google Scholar
Mullen, K.T. (1991). Color vision as a post-receptoral specialization of the central visual field. Vision Research 31, 119–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullen, K.T. & Kingdom, F.A.A. (2002). Differential distributions of red–green and blue–yellow cone opponency across the visual field. Visual Neuroscience 19, 109–118.Google Scholar
Murray, I.J., Parry, N.R.A., Kremers, J., Stepien, M., & Schild, A. (2004). Photoreceptor topography and cone-specific ERGs. Visual Neuroscience 21, 231–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, I.J. & Plainis, S. (2003). Contrast coding and magno/parvo segregation revealed in reaction time studies. Vision Research 43, 2707–2719.Google Scholar
Plainis, S. & Murray, I.J. (2000). Neurophysiological interpretation of human visual reaction times: Effect of contrast, spatial frequency and luminance. Neuropsychologia 38, 1555–1564.Google Scholar
Roorda, A. & Williams, D.R. (1999). The arrangement of the three cone classes in the living human eye. Nature 397, 520–522.Google Scholar
Sharpe, L.T., Stockman, A., Knau, H., & Jagle, H. (1998). Macular pigment densities derived from central and peripheral spectral sensitivity differences. Vision Research 38, 3233–3239.Google Scholar
Smith, V.C. & Pokorny, J. (1975). Spectral sensitivity of the foveal cone photopigment between 400 and 500 nm. Vision Research 15, 161–171.Google Scholar
Smithson, H.E. & Mollon, J.D. (2001). Reaction times to brief chromatic stimuli. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science 42, 532.Google Scholar
Smithson, H.E., Sumner, P., & Mollon, J.D. (2003). How to find a Tritan line. In Normal and Defective Colour Vision, ed. Mollon, J.D., Pokorny, J. & Knoblauch, K., pp. 279–287. New York: Oxford University Press.
Snodderly, D.M., Brown, P.K., Delori, F.C., & Auran, J.D. (1984). The macular pigment, 1. Absorbance spectra, localization, and discrimination from other yellow pigments in primate retinas. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science 25, 660–673.Google Scholar
Williams, D.R., MacLeod, D.I.A., & Hayhoe, M.M. (1981). Foveal Tritanopia. Vision Research 21, 1341–1356.Google Scholar