A computational study of background
Transcription
A computational study of background
1 A computational study of background-induced flicker enhancement and feedback mechanisms in vertebrate outer retina: temporal properties Steven M. Baer1, Shaojie Chang1,4, Sharon M. Crook1,2, Carl L. Gardner1, Jeremiah R. Jones1,5, Ralph F. Nelson3, Christian Ringhofer1, and Dritan Zela1 1 School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287 2 School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287 3 Neural Circuits Unit, Basic Neuroscience Program, NINDS, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892 4 The High School Affiliated to Beijing Normal University, Beijing, P.R.China 100052 5 Chemical Sciences , CHAP , Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, Berkeley, CA 94720 Running head: Temporal properties of flicker enhancement and feedback mechanisms Contact information: Steven M. Baer, School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona 85287-1804; Telephone: (480) 965-1057. Facsimile: (480) 965-8119. e-mail: [email protected] 2 ABSTRACT In vertebrate outer retina, changes in the membrane potential of horizontal cells affect the calcium influx and glutamate release of cone photoreceptors via a negative feedback mechanism. This feedback has a number of important physiological consequences. One is called backgroundinduced flicker enhancement in which the onset of dim background enhances the center flicker response of horizontal cells. The underlying mechanism for the feedback is unclear but competing hypotheses have been proposed. One is the GABA hypothesis, which states that the inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA, released from horizontal cells, mediates the feedback by blocking calcium channels. Another is the ephaptic hypothesis, which contends that calcium entry is regulated by changes in the electrical potential within the intersynaptic space between cones and horizontal cells. In this study, a continuum spine model of cone-horizontal cell synaptic circuitry is formulated. This model, a partial differential equation system, incorporates both the GABA and ephaptic feedback mechanisms. Simulation results, in comparison with experiments, indicate that the ephaptic mechanism is necessary in order for the model to capture the major temporal dynamics of background-induced flicker enhancement. As a corollary we have discovered that biasing the cone synaptic voltage directly with surround current can trigger enhancement, provided a horizontal cell feedback mechanism is attached to the cone. Our results indicate that the GABA mechanism may play a secondary modulation role. Simulations that included both mechanisms best fit (qualitatively) enhancement data for cat retina, and provided valuable insights into interpreting the dynamics of calcium activation in feedback experiments on goldfish retina. 3 INTRODUCTION The retina is part of the central nervous system and an ideal region for studying information processing in the brain. It is accessible, well documented, and the subject of research spanning the clinical, experimental, and theoretical sciences. Visual processing begins in the outer plexiform layer of the retina, where bipolar, horizontal, and photoreceptor cells interact. In this first layer of the visual pathway, knowledge of synaptic feedback mechanisms allows for the formulation of computational models that encapsulate essential phenomenology. From the biologist's perspective, mathematical modeling allows one to isolate the functional effects of various circuitry elements, similar to performing experiments with selective pharmacological agents or genetic modifications, except that not all the agents or modifications one might like actually exist. From the mathematician's perspective, the availability of electrophysiological, anatomical, and molecular data provides a rare opportunity for the construction of complex multiscale models for the system. In this paper we model, in detail, the subcircuits of the outer plexiform layer, capturing the temporal dynamics on two spatial scales - that of an individual synapse and of the receptive field (hundreds to thousands of synapses). We apply the model to compare theory with experiment for background-induced flicker enhancement in cat retinal horizontal cells. In the outer plexiform layer of the retina there are four types of neurons that interact: rods, cones, bipolar, and horizontal cells. The rods and cones serve as receptor cells, providing the synaptic input to this layer; whereas the bipolar cells are the output neurons that carry visual information to the inner plexiform layer. The horizontal cells extend their dendritic branches widely in the outer plexiform layer and are confined to this layer. A prominent feature of the 4 horizontal cells is their electrical (gap) junctions. The gap junctions are so numerous that it is reasonable to view the collection of horizontal cells as a syncytium or a conductive sheet. The horizontal cell syncytium increases the size of the receptive field and mediates interactions between rods and cones (Frumkes and Eysteinsson, 1988). The horizontal cells in this study are of the A-type, which is axonless and has a dendritic tree with its terminals ending in cone pedicles (Kolb 1974; Perlman et al. 2012). Although an A-type horizontal cell does not have direct synaptic contact with rods, it receives rod inputs indirectly from cones since rod signals can enter cones via rod-cone gap junctions (Raviola and Gilula 1973; Kolb 1977; Nelson 1977; Smith et al. 1986; Wu 1994; Schneeweis and Schnapf 1995). To understand the neural subcircuits within the first layer of the visual pathway, it is important to draw upon knowledge from both psychophysics and electrophysiology. In human psychophysics, it is well known that after a brilliant desensitizing flash, cone flicker sensitivity first increases but then, paradoxically, decreases with a time course paralleling rod dark adaptations (Goldberg et al. 1983). This interaction between rods and cones is called suppressive rod-cone interaction (SRCI). Analogous physiological effects involving rod and cone signals occur in horizontal and bipolar cells (Eysteinsson and Frumkes 1989; Frumkes and Eysteinsson 1988; Pflug et al. 1990). For example, in cat, the onset of dim backgrounds can enhance smallspot flicker responses of retinal horizontal cells (Pflug et al. 1990). This is called backgroundinduced flicker enhancement. It is generally accepted that background-induced flicker enhancement is due to horizontal-cone feedback: hyperpolarized horizontal cell dendritic terminals effectively increase the entry of calcium into the cone terminal, stimulating the release of transmitter glutamate by the cone presynaptic apparatus. The result is a depolarization of the horizontal cell; that is, an increase in synaptic gain. This explanation accounts for how 5 peripheral rod-induced, horizontal cell hyperpolarizations, conducted centripetally to the horizontal cell dendritic terminals via gap junctions, can enhance postsynaptic cone responses (Nelson et al. 1990). Currently there are three hypotheses to explain an increase in calcium entry in response to horizontal cell hyperpolarization: the GABA, ephaptic, and pH hypotheses. Gammaaminobutyric acid (GABA) is an inhibitory neurotransmitter that occurs in many different varieties of amacrine cells and in one or more classes of horizontal cell in most vertebrate retinas (Marc et al. 1995). Under the GABA hypothesis hyperpolarization of the horizontal cell reduces the release of blocking agent GABA from the horizontal cell, allowing calcium to enter the cone terminal, stimulating glutamate release by the cone presynaptic apparatus (Nelson et al. 1990; Corey et al. 1984; Belgum and Copenhagen 1988). A schematic diagram of this hypothesis is shown in Fig. 9 of Nelson et al. (1990). The other two hypotheses, ephaptic and pH, both modulate calcium channels on the cone terminal for calcium entry but their mechanisms differ. The ephaptic hypothesis (Byzov and Shurabura 1986; Kamermans et al. 2001) involves horizontal cell hemichannels and cone voltage-gated calcium channels. A hemichannel (also called connexons) is half of a gap junction; that is, it is a gap junction on one cell (here, a horizontal cell) but not on the adjacent cell, leaving it open into the extracellular space (Spray 2006). According to the ephaptic hypothesis, as depicted in Fig. 1A of Fahrenhort et al. (2009), hyperpolarization of the horizontal cell increases hemichannel-mediated current flow into the horizontal cell. Since this current must pass through an intersynaptic resistance, the potential drop over this resistance will increase, making the potential in the synapse even more negative. The voltage sensitive calcium channels on the cone terminal will sense a larger depolarization, opening more calcium channels and therefore more calcium influx into the cone which 6 stimulates glutamate release. In other words, the current flow into the hemichannel coupled with the high resistance path of the synaptic cleft shifts the calcium current activation in the cones to more negative potentials (Kamermans and Fahrenfort 2004; Fahrenfort et al. 2009). A compartment model developed by Fahrenfort et al (2009) supports the ephaptic hypothesis. This model was developed as a rebuttal to the model by Dmitriev and Mangel (2006) that claimed it is unlikely that an electrical mechanism plays a significant functional role in the feedback response. A recent computational study at the single synapse level, using a drift-diffusion (Poisson-NernstPlank) model, reproduced experimental current-voltage curves for the goldfish retina in response to a bright spot with and without an illuminated background, adding support to the ephaptic hypothesis (Gardner et al. 2012). The pH hypothesis provides an alternative to the ephaptic mechanism. Under this hypothesis extracellular pH changes in the intersynaptic cleft mediate the feedback. Specifically, horizontal cell hyperpolarization alkalinizes the cleft, and the decrease in extracellular proton concentration then alters the gating of pH-sensitive calcium channels in the presynaptic cone pedicle and results in an increase of cone calcium current in the form of a negative shift of the current’s activation potential (Barnes et al. 1993, Hirasawa and Kaneko 2003). The mechanism by which horizontal cell polarization modulates the extracellular pH is still unknown, although hemichannel-mediated proton transport (Kamermans and Fahrenfort 2004, Fahrenfort et al. 2009), amiloride-sensitive proton channels (Vessey et al. 2005), or some other proton transport system (Bouvier et al. 1992, Hirasawa and Kaneko 2003) on the horizontal cell spines serve as possible candidates. In 1990, Nelson and Pflug (Pflug et al. 1990; Nelson et al. 1990) recorded from horizontal cells of cat retina and demonstrated that photopic flicker components of horizontal cell responses 7 were enhanced during hyperpolarization of the horizontal cell by background light (see Fig. 1 in Pflug et al. 1990). Figure 1A shows the enhancement effect from simulations. To quantify the enhancement effect, a variable E or “percent enhancement” was defined as E = 100 [(Fbkgd / Fdark) – 1], where Fbkgd and Fdark are mean flicker response amplitudes for background illuminated and dark, respectively (Frumkes and Eysteinsson 1988). Nelson and Pflug's experiments revealed some important dynamical properties associated with the feedback mechanism. One was a slow repolarization of background-induced hyperpolarization, called ‘sag’ or ‘rollback,’ followed by an overshoot or post-inhibitory rebound when the background light was turned off (Fig. 1A and Fig. 1 in Plug et al. 1990). Another was the two-limbed nature of the E vs. flicker frequency curve: E gradually increased below 20 Hz and then rapidly increased above this frequency (Fig. 1B and Fig. 4 in Pflug et al. 1990). In addition, Nelson and Pflug observed background-induced changes in flicker waveform in the form of a phase shift. They found a phase shift in flicker waveform between a flicker cycle in the dark and a flicker cycle with background illuminated (Fig. 1C and Fig. 5 in Pflug et al. 1990). The dynamical properties associated with background-induced feedback experiments provide important clues for determining if one or more of the competing hypotheses for calcium entry are appropriate. In this paper we focus on GABA and ephaptic mechanisms. We formulate and analyze a partial differential equation system that models the horizontal cell syncytium and its numerous spiny processes forming synapses within invaginated synaptic clefts of the cone pedicles, and compare simulation results with enhancement data for slit and square test regions. In addition, we consider the case of a constant (non-flickering) circular or disk test region to study steady state calcium current-voltage relationships in the presence and absence of a full field background illumination. 8 This study demonstrates that an ephaptic mechanism produces reasonable qualitative agreement with temporal data from background-induced flicker enhancement experiments. In addition we find that although GABA produces enhancement, this mechanism alone is insufficient to reproduce the full repertoire of temporal dynamics exhibited by the flicker enhancement experiments. We find that the best fit to the enhancement data is obtained when both the GABA and the ephaptic mechanisms are included in the model. Our simulations show that for this hybrid model GABA effectively fine tunes the more dominant ephaptic mechanism. It is important to state that this study does not rule out the pH hypothesis as a possible mechanism. It is indeed possible that a pH mechanism could produce similar computational results as our hybrid model. Finally, we reserve for future study the spatial properties of the enhancement effect; for example, comparing the dependence of percent flicker enhancement on test region size for different geometries. This will require a modification of the model to account for the desensitization of rods when exposed to bright flicker (see Discussion). 9 METHODS In this section we formulate a mathematical model of the horizontal cell syncytium and its numerous processes that form synapses within cone pedicles. This multiscale model incorporates both GABA and ephaptic synaptic mechanisms and captures dynamics on two spatial scales: the scale of the individual synapse and the scale of the receptive field. The horizontal cell network and spine processes We model the horizontal cell network or syncytium as a thin conducting sheet in the xy-plane (Lamb, 1976; Nelson 1977; Nelson et al. 1990). We assume that the sheet or slab of horizontal cells constitutes a planar region that includes the origin of the xy-plane (0,0). In addition, emanating from the sheet are numerous horizontal-cell dendritic processes (spines) that form synapses within invaginations of cone pedicles (Winslow et al. 1989). The spine density N is defined as the number of spines per unit physical area. Over an area element ∆A, the spines deliver current ∆A N ISS to the syncytium, where ISS represents the current flowing through an individual spine stem. This stem current is expressed as an I∙R voltage drop across the spine stem resistance RSS (MΩ), given by I SS U H VH RSS , (1) where UH and VH (mV) denote the membrane potentials in the horizontal cell spine head and network, respectively. The spine stem is modeled, as in previous studies, as a lumped Ohmic resistor, neglecting the stem's membrane and cable properties (Miller et al. 1985; Rall and Segev 1987; Segev and Rall 1988; Baer and Rinzel 1991). 10 The equation for the membrane potential in the sheet VH (x,y,t) is a current balance relation for the capacitive, gap junction, stem, and ionic currents given by Cm VH 1 2 VH N I SS I ion , t RS (2) where Cm (F/cm2) is the specific membrane capacitance, RS (M) is the horizontal cell gap junction sheet resistance, and Iion (μA/cm2) is an ionic current density passing through the horizontal cell membrane. Multiplying through by Rm (∙cm2), the passive membrane resistance for horizontal cells, we substitute the membrane time constant m = Rm Cm, the length constant Rm / RS (Naka and Rushton 1967), and the dimensionless spine density n 2 N into Eq. (2) to arrive at the equation for the horizontal cell syncytium m VH 22VH RS n I SS I ion Rm . t (3) In this study we assume that the spine density is constant. To justify the use of the above continuum spine equation for horizontal cells, the spine density must be sufficiently large (Baer and Rinzel 1991). A typical mammalian cone pedicle has approximately 30 triads of processes (Ahnelt et al. 1990). Each triad typically contains one bipolar and two horizontal cell dendritic terminals (Kolb et al. 2012). Therefore, a cone pedicle makes synaptic contacts with about 60 horizontal cell spines. For cat retina, a modest estimate of cone density is approximately 6.4 × 105 cones/cm2 (Steinberg et al. 1973; Williams et al. 1993), and estimating an average of 60 spines/cone yields a spine density of N ≈ 384 × 105 spines/cm2. For cat, reasonable estimates are Rm = 104 ∙cm2 and RS = 12 M. With these values, ≈ 289 μm and the number of spines 11 per electrotonic area is therefore n ≈ 3.2 × 104, which is large enough to justify a continuum formulation. The spine stem resistance values are also quite large. Modeling the spine stems as circular cylinders of diameter dss and length Lss, and with constant intracellular resistivity Ri, the spine stem resistance is defined as RSS = (4Lss Ri ) / ( dss2 ) . In cat, Ri is estimated to be about 200 Ω∙cm (Smith 1995; Spruston and Johnston 1992), Lss ≈ 5 μm and dss ≈ 0.1 μm. For these estimates, RSS ≈ 1300 M, which is quite high considering we are not accounting for possible constrictions in the stem that would raise the stem resistance even higher. It is important to note that there are no excitable channels in this system capable of generating action potentials. Consequently the spine head potentials closely approximate the slab potential (see Discussion). The above estimates for spine density and stem resistance are summarized in Fig.2. We model the horizontal cell spine head as an isopotential compartment with surface area Ash (μm2) and specific membrane capacitance Cm, thus individual spines have a capacitance of Csh = Ash Cm (μF) . The equation for the membrane potential UH (x,y,t) in a single horizontal cell spine head is obtained from a current balance relation for the capacitive, ionic, and spine stem currents given by Csh U H Ash I ion I syn I ss . t (4) The synaptic current Isyn, which is activated by transmitter glutamate [GL] (M) released from the cone, is defined by I syn g syn U H , (5) 12 where gsyn = ksyn [GL] (nS) is the synaptic conductance. Here the synaptic reversal potential is zero, so that the glutamate current is inward when the cell is hyperpolarized. The glutamate concentration in the synaptic cleft is governed by GL [GL] kCa I Ca [GL] . t (6) The time rate of change of glutamate is balanced by the release of glutamate triggered by cone calcium current (ICa < 0) and the uptake of glutamate by transporters. In the present model we assume that ‘sag’ or ‘rollback’ of the horizontal cell membrane potential, followed by post-inhibitory rebound, is due to ionic currents. In fish and mammalian retinal horizontal cells, T-type or T-type-like calcium currents were reported (Löhrke and Hofmann 1994; Pfeiffer-Linn and Lasater 1993; Schubert et al. 2006; Sullivan and Lasater 1992), together with N-type, L-type and other types of calcium currents, sodium current, and various types of potassium currents (Löhrke and Hofmann 1994; Ueda et al. 1992). Therefore, we model Iion in Eqs. (3) and (4) as the sum of a nonlinear inward ‘sag’ current and a linear leakage current. Here our modeling follows the form of Golomb et al. (1994). Specifically, Iion (V , h) (V Esag ) gsag h (V ELH ) g LH , (7) where h, an inactivating gating variable, is defined as h h h (V ) h . t (8) Here, h (V ) (1 e(V h )/ h )1 , (9) where τh, θh, and σh are constants. In the above equations V and h are replaced by VH and hV in Eq. (3) and by UH and hU in Eq. (4) . 13 The cone The horizontal cell spine head forms a synapse with the cone pedicle. We assume that within an invagination of the cone, the adjacent cone membrane area is of the same magnitude as the surface area of the horizontal cell spine head. The part of the cone forming the invagination is treated as an isopotential compartment, and across its membrane the capacitive current is balanced by a leakage current, a “dark” current, and two input currents. The cone equation is Cm VC g LC (VC ELC ) I dark I flick I bkgd , t (10) where the cone membrane potential is denoted by VC(x,y,t). The first term on the right of Eq.(10) is a leakage current density with reversal potential ELC (mV) and conductance gLC (nS/cm2). We note that calcium entry into cones activates chloride currents (Lansansky 1984). The activation of chloride currents occur on a relatively long time scale, between 200 to 2000 ms. Rather than adding another linear term for the chloride current in Eq.(10), we lump the chloride current into this leak term. The second term Idark (μA/cm2) is the density of a constant “dark” current representing a steady inward cation current mainly contributed by sodium ions that depolarize the membrane potential in darkness (Hagins et al. 1970; Bear et al. 2007; Yau 1994). In this paper there are two applied current sources Iflick and Ibkgd (μA/cm2). The current density Iflick (μA/cm2) represents current transduced from a flicker stimulus, applied over a region S centered at the origin in the xy-plane. The current density Ibkgd represents current transduced from a constant background stimulus. In order to compare computational results to experimental data, we modeled both slit and square test stimuli. In addition, we modeled disk (circular) test stimuli and found that the results were nearly indistinguishable from square test stimuli of similar size, but the disk model had the added advantage of being computationally more efficient. 14 It is important to point out that A-type horizontal cells, which are connected only to cones, respond with a mixture of rod and cone signals. This mixing is thought to arise at the photoreceptor level where rods and cones are interconnected by gap junctions. In addition, feedback to horizontal cells from the interplexiform cells has not been observed in cat retina (Pflug et al. 1990; Kolb and West 1977). Therefore the current Ibkgd, representing the diffuse background stimulus, is modeled as entering the cone through rod-cone gap junctions, whereas Iflick is modeled as resulting from the cone transduction process. Rods within the test region are light adapted by the flicker stimulation and therefore the rod signal within the test region is significantly reduced. In addition, and independently, rods hyperpolarized by the background may act globally to shorten the horizontal-cell length constant by uncoupling gap junctions (Nelson et al. 1990). A more general model that includes an additional rod-equation and a state-dependent gap junction resistance RS would be required to adequately model the above two effects (see Discussion). However, our focus in this paper is on temporal properties, subject to a few changes in test region size and geometry. Therefore, to compensate for the above effects we reduce the background current within the stimulus region to Ibkgd , where 0 ≤ ≤ 1. A smaller value of γ implies a larger desensitization of rods within the region. In our simulations we will change the value of , which we will call the desensitization factor, only when the flicker stimulus size, geometry, or irradiance is changed. Finally, we assume that the influx of calcium current into the cone has a negligible effect on the cone membrane potential, therefore Eq.(10) has no term for ICa feedback. The effect of ICa on cone membrane potential is assumed to be small since the calcium conductance is small relative to the total membrane conductance of the cone (Kraiaij et al. 2000; Verweij et al. 1996), and under physiological conditions, the depolarizing effect of ICa on cone membrane potential is 15 counteracted by the hyperpolarizing effect of calcium-activated chloride currents (Kamermans and Spekreijse, 1999; Kraaij et al. 2000; Verweij et al. 1996). Under these assumptions the cone potential VC , computed explicitly from Eq.(10), drives (but is not driven by) the rest of the system. Figure 3 illustrates the applied currents Iflick and Ibkgd in Eq.(10), defined for the slit test-region S shown in Fig.3A. In general, S is a simply-connected region in the plane, centered at the origin. In this study we look at the flicker response of the horizontal cell membrane potential at the center of square, slit, and disk test-regions. Figure 3B shows the “square” wave flicker stimulus Iflick as a function of time. However, as the insets illustrate, the onset and offset of each wave cycle is defined to be smooth and sigmoidal. Likewise, the spatial transition for both Iflick and Ibkgd across the boundary of S is sigmoidal, as shown in the Fig.3C insets for the minimum values of Iflick. Finally, we reduce the background current inside the stimulus region by multiplying Ibkgd inside S by the fraction γ as shown in Fig.3D. Note that the offset speed of Ibkgd is set slower than its onset speed to account for rod after-effect, namely, the slow return of the rod-induced hyperpolarization towards its baseline after the background is turned off (Steinberg 1969a, 1969b; Pflug et al. 1990). The functions used to generate Iflick and Ibkgd for slit, square, and disk test-regions are explicitly defined in the APPENDIX. The horizontal cell-to-cone feedback synapse We model the cone calcium current ICa (pA) as Ca I Ca (VC U H ECa ) gCa I Ca . t (1 e (VC U H A)/ B ) (1 kOCa [G]) (11) 16 Here, ICa is inward ICa 0 if and outward if ICa 0 . The factor (VC U H ECa ) gCa (1 e(VC U H A) B ) is a linear current multiplied by a sigmoidal activation curve (Barnes et al. 1993). In addition, the dependence on UH, scaled by , phenomenologically models the ephaptic mechanism (see Discussion) and is motivated by the experimental results on goldfish retina (Verweij et al. 1996). The expression 1/(1+kOCa[G]) is derived from a Hill function on the binding kinetics of GABA to open calcium channels, and represents the fraction of open calcium channels as a function of extracellular GABA concentration [G] with kOCa (1/M) being the binding constant. Thus, the product of the maximum conductance gca and the fraction 1/(1+kOCa[G]) reflects the GABA-mediated modulation of cone calcium conductance. The last term represents calcium removal from the cone by extrusion to extracellular space or binding to intracellular stores. A novel feature of our model is that Eq.(11) allows for the option of a hybrid mechanism combining both GABA and ephaptic mechanisms. We explore the possibility that both mechanisms jointly contribute to the feedback effect. We model the dynamics of [G] as G [G] kG (U H EG ) , t (12) where EG RT ln([G ] [Gi ]) F ni log ([G ] [Gi ]) RT ln(10) 10 F ni is the Nernst potential for GABA. In Eq.(12), G (13) and kG are the time constant and scaling factor for the GABA kinetics. Based on the fact that the release of GABA is voltage-dependent 17 (Schwartz 1982, Schwartz 1987), GABA is treated as an ni-charged particle whose balance between its extracellular concentration [G] and intracellular concentration [Gi] is controlled by the difference between UH, the membrane potential of the horizontal-cell spine head, and EG, the Nernst-type ‘reversal potential’ of GABA. Equations (12) and (13) are for reverse transport of GABA (i.e., non-vesicular GABA release) since they model both the GABA release from and reuptake into horizontal cells as membrane transport processes (Schwartz 2002). There is also some evidence for vesicular release of neurotransmitters from horizontal cells (Hirano et al. 2007). The GABA release mechanism modeled here is not vesicular. In Eq.(13), R is the gas constant (8.314 J mol-1 K-1), T is the temperature (in K), and F is the Faraday constant (96485 C mol-1). In our simulations we use the same temperature as in the enhancement experiments, namely 37oC, corresponding to (RT/F) ln(10) = 61.5 mV. Summary of the equations for a general two-dimensional test region Substituting Eq. (1) into (3), Eqs. (1) and (5) into (4) (with gsyn = ksyn [GL]), Eq. (13) into (12), and including the equations associated with Iion for the slab and spine heads (Eqs. (7)-(9)), the continuum model for a two-dimensional horizontal cell sheet with n spines per electrotonic area is m VH U VH 22VH RS n H I ion (VH , hV ) Rm t RSS (14) Csh U H U -V ksyn [GL] U H H H Iion (U H , hU ) Ash t RSS (15) GL [GL] kCa I Ca [GL] t (16) 18 I Ca (VC U H ECa ) gCa I Ca t (1 e (VC U H A)/ B ) (1 kOCa [G]) Ca G h (17) [G] RT ln([G] [Gi ]) kG U H t F ni hV h h (VH ) hV , h U h (U H ) hU , t t (18) (19, 20) where VC is the solution to the equation Cm VC g LC (VC ELC ) I dark I flick I bkgd . t (21) In the above equations, the state variables depend on x, y, and t. Functions Iion and h∞ are defined by Eqs. (7) and (9) respectively. Parameter values for Eqs. (14)-(21) are listed in Table 1. In the absence of Iflick and Ibkgd the steady-state values of the state variables are chosen as the initial conditions and are listed in Table 2. Reference parameters for Iflick and Ibkgd, are listed in Table 3. The overall dynamics and feedback mechanisms for this model are summarized in Fig.4. In general, the equations for all geometries are solved by the numerical method of lines. Specifically, the partial differential equation system (14)-(21) is defined over a finite domain and then discretized in space using centered differencing for the spatial derivatives. This generates a system of ordinary differential equations (ODEs) for each grid point, which is then solved using MATLAB’s built-in stiff ODE solver ode23tb (Mathworks 2012), an L-stable implicit RungeKutta method implementing the TR-BDF2 algorithm (Bank et al. 1985). The method is second order accurate in both space and time (LeVeque 2007). The computation time is significantly reduced by first taking advantage of symmetries inherent in slit, square, and disk geometries. 19 These symmetry reductions, the boundary conditions for the finite domain problem, and the specific functions used to generate Iflick and Ibkgd are presented in the APPENDIX. 20 RESULTS Our objective is to determine which hypothesis, GABA or ephaptic, best fits the temporal enhancement data. To address this we have formulated a partial differential equation system (14)-(21) that models the electro-chemical dynamics of the horizontal cell syncytium and its numerous processes that form synapses within cone pedicles. We now compare simulation results with enhancement data for square and slit test-stimulus regions. In addition, we consider the case of a constant (non-flickering) circular or disk shaped test-region to compare feedbackinduced shifts in calcium current for the competing hypotheses. Background-induced flicker enhancement Figure 5 simulates the experiment (Pflug et al. 1990; Fig. 1) where a low amplitude, 16 Hz, 250 m flickering red square test-stimulus is followed by a broad-field, blue diffuse background stimulus of duration approximately one second. In both the experiment and simulations the time course of the horizontal cell membrane potential VH is recorded at the center of the test region. In the experiment, the application of the background stimulus induces a hyperpolarizaton of about 5 mV. In addition there is an enhancement effect in which the amplitude of the oscillatory response nearly doubles. Recall that the enhancement effect is quantified by the percent change in the mean flicker response amplitude, given by E 100 ( Fbkgd Fdark ) Fdark , (22) where Fbkgd and Fdark are the mean flicker response amplitudes for when the background is illuminated and dark respectively. In Eq. (22), a flicker response amplitude that doubles when the background is on (Fbkgd = 2 Fdark ) has a percent enhancement of E = 100. If E > 100 then 21 Fbkgd is more than twice the value of Fdark , E = 0 implies no change in mean flicker response amplitude, and E < 0 corresponds to a decrease in Fbkgd when compared to Fdark . Experiments have shown that the percent enhancement depends on the flicker frequency, the geometry and size of the stimulus region over which it is applied, as well as the magnitude of the diffuse background stimulus. Figure 5A, which is a re-scaling of the plot shown in Fig. 1A, is qualitatively similar to the experimental result in Fig.1 of Pflug et al. (1990) where the flicker response amplitude nearly doubles when the background is on. Here we simulate a hybrid case where both the ephaptic and GABA mechanisms are included. To accomplish this we set kG = 1 in Eq. (18) for the GABA concentration and = 0.88 in Eq. (17) for the calcium current. In addition to the enhancement effect the simulation captures the ‘sag’ and post-inhibitory rebound dynamics seen in experiments. However, in our model the enhancement effect is independent of the sag and postinhibitory dynamics. That is, when Iion and its auxiliary equations are removed from the equation set, enhancement not only persists but retains its magnitude (see Discussion). The beauty of doing simulations is that we can selectively block the ephaptic mechanism, the GABA mechanism, or both. The GABA mechanism is blocked by setting kG = 0 in Eq. (18), thereby forcing the GABA concentration to remain constant. This is the ephaptic-only case shown in Fig. 5B. Here the dynamics are similar to Fig.5A but the percent enhancement is reduced from 99 to 87. To block the ephaptic mechanism, GABA is reinstated by re-setting kG = 1, but now the ephaptic mechanism is turned off by setting = 0 in Eq. (17). In the ephaptic feedback mechanism, hyperpolarization of the horizontal cell causes calcium channels to open. Setting = 0 in Eq. (17) removes the dependence of the calcium current on the horizontal cell potential UH. The only way for calcium channels to open is by changes in the 22 cone potential VC. The result for the GABA-only case, shown in Fig.5C, is a large hyperpolarization accompanied by a sharp reduction in percent enhancement to 22. In Fig. 5D, both mechanisms, GABA and ephaptic, are selectively blocked (kG = 0, The dynamics are similar to Fig. 5C, but the percent enhancement becomes negative (E = -0.75) which means that the flicker response amplitude decreases when the background is illuminated. Figure 6 simulates a background-induced flicker enhancement experiment for a 16Hz, 250m slit test-stimulus. Although we do not have experimental results showing the time course of the flicker dynamics, the experimental value for the percent enhancement for this frequency is approximately 40 (Pflug et al. 1990; Fig.4). In our simulations, the percent enhancement for the hybrid mechanism is 37 and for the ephaptic-only case 32. The GABA-only mechanism is also close to the experimental value with an enhancement of 35. When both mechanisms are blocked, enhancement persists but falls to 23. This significant but reduced enhancement for the control case is primarily due to the low γ value as compared to the square stimuli. This result demonstrates that there are potentially three enhancement mechanisms in the model: ephaptic, GABA, and Ibkgd biasing (see Discussion). Thus Ibkgd , depending on magnitude, may either enhance the flicker response, or diminish it. Frequency and phase properties of background-induced flicker enhancement Pflug et al. (1990) have shown in experiments that flicker response amplitudes decline with increasing frequency, but background-induced flicker enhancement increases. In addition, they reported that although two different cells under different stimulus conditions (e.g.; square versus slit stimuli) can produce quite different frequency dependencies, the curves reveal a common feature. The enhancement versus frequency curves have a “two-limbed” feature, characterized 23 by a gradual increase in percent enhancement below 20 Hz and a relatively rapid increase above this frequency. Figures 7 and 8 compare simulations with experiment for square and slit test-regions. The solid curves are the percent enhancement plotted against flicker frequency for each of the different mechanisms. The dotted curves consist of points taken from the cubic regression of the experimental data in Fig.4 of Pflug et al. (1990). In panels A and B of both figures the hybrid and the ephaptic-only cases qualitatively fit the experimental results for both squares and slits, capturing the “two-limbed” feature. In contrast, panels C and D clearly show that the GABAonly and the control case do not qualitatively fit the data. Here, for both square and slit testregions, the percent enhancement decreases with increasing frequency, and can even become negative for large frequencies. Although in experiments enhancement increases with frequency, these same experiments indicate that flicker response amplitudes decrease. This decrease in amplitude, before and during background onset, is shown in Fig. 3 of Pflug et al. (1990) for a square test-region. Our simulations confirm this result for hybrid and ephaptic-only cases with both square and slit testregions. Figure 9 shows the declining flicker response amplitude with increasing frequency for the hybrid case subject to a square test-stimulus. The time scale in Figure 9 is stretched to highlight the similarities between the model simulations and Fig. 3 in the experiment. Note that although the flicker response amplitudes decline with frequency, background-induced flicker enhancement increases from 60 at 10 Hz to greater than 100 at 20 Hz. As the dark flicker response amplitudes become negligibly small the enhancement rapidly increases to nearly 300. However, for these large enhancement values, cone flicker sensitivity most likely decreases due to the sharp reduction in flicker response amplitude. 24 Another useful way to test the validity of the model and the competing hypotheses is to look at background-induced phase shifts in flicker enhancement experiments. In Fig. 5 of Pflug et al. (1990) the single-cycle waveforms of flicker response with and without background illumination were compared for a square test stimulus. They scaled the dark flicker response amplitude to the amplitude of the background-on flicker cycle and then superimposed the plots. For higher frequencies ( > 11 Hz) the repolarizing phase of the flicker cycle with background-on was shifted approximately 5 ms in advance of the dark flicker cycle. The hyperpolarizing phase was less affected, with the background-on flicker cycle shifted only slightly in advance of the dark flicker cycle. Figures 10 and 11 show the background-induced phase shift in the flicker response VH for the model with square and slit-shaped test regions. In Fig. 10 both the hybrid and the ephaptic-only cases produce background-induced phase advances during the repolarizing phase of the waveform. However, this phase advance continues into the hyperpolarizing phase with a magnitude significantly larger than seen in the experiment. The GABA-only case and the control case produce background-induced phase delays which are not consistent with experimental observation. Figure 11 shows that the results for a slit-shaped test region are qualitatively similar to the square test region, but the shifts are significantly smaller in magnitude. Unfortunately, experimental phase shift data is unavailable for the slit stimulus geometry. It is important to note that the specific forms of the phase shifts seen in Figs.10 and 11 are shaped by the entire system of equations. However, there are two equations in our system that when isolated, can generate a phase shift response. The first is Eq. (17) for ICa . When UH is decoupled from Eq. (17), by setting α = 0, and [G] is held constant by setting kG = 0 in 25 Eq. (18), we have the control case where neither feedback mechanism is present, and the cone potential VC is the only time varying forcing function in Eq. (17). At background-on VC is prescribed to hyperpolarize without a change in amplitude and without a phase shift. Yet Fig.12 (top left) clearly demonstrates that ICa exhibits a background-induced phase shift. In Eq.(17) the linear current multiplied by the sigmoidal activation function is, mathematically, the source of the background-induced phase shift for this case. Equation (15) is the other equation in the system that can independently generate a phase shift response; specifically the synaptic term involving glutamate. To demonstrate this we have decoupled the stem current from Eq. (15) and prescribed [GL] as a sinusoidal forcing function of the form [GL] = D + A sin ωt , choosing D and A to roughly approximate the [GL] response for the hybrid case: (ω = 2π/57.5; D = 15; A = 4 for background-off and A = 7 for backgroundon). We found that by simply increasing the amplitude of [GL], corresponding to backgroundon, was sufficient to produce a robust phase shift response in UH. Furthermore, we have found that when the ionic current was replaced by a linear leakage current, in Eq.(15), the backgroundinduced phase shift persisted. It is important to re-emphasize that although both Eq. (15) and Eq. (17) have the capacity to generate a phase shift response independently, it is the coupling of the entire system of equations that ultimately shapes the background-induced phase shifts observed in Figs. 10 and 11. Glutamate reuptake can influence background-induced phase shifts. In Fig.12 the background-induced phase shifts of ICa , [GL] , and UH are compared for a ten-fold increase in the glutamate reuptake rate. In the absence of the ephaptic and GABA kinetics (Fig.12A), increasing glutamate reuptake by a factor of ten has no effect on the phase shift dynamics of inward calcium current ICa (left panels). The reason is that in Eq. (17) UH is decoupled (α = 0) 26 and [G] is constant, and since [GL] influences ICa through UH and [G] in Eqs. (15) and (18) respectively, increasing the reuptake rate has no influence on Eq. (17) for this case. Figure 12A (middle) shows that increasing the reuptake rate of [GL] results in an approximate ten-fold decrease in [GL] accompanied by a small change in phase shift dynamics (Fig.12A, middle panels). In contrast Fig.12B for the ephaptic only case exhibits a more pronounced change in the phase shift dynamics for all three variables due to the re-coupling of UH in Eq. (17). Here ICa exhibits a change in phase shift dynamics (Fig.12B, left panels) that influences the dynamics of [GL] in Eq.(16). This contributes to a significant change in the phase shift dynamics of UH (Fig.12B, right panels). Background-induced shift in calcium current and center-surround antagonism Here, we consider the case of a constant (non-flickering) circular or disk shaped test-region in the presence and absence of a full-field background illumination to compare feedback-induced shifts in calcium activation for the competing hypotheses. In addition we show that simulations with the full model, Eqs. (14)-(21), are qualitatively consistent with the results of feedback experiments on goldfish retina, and that ICa and [GL] exhibit center-surround antagonism. Recall that the formulation of Eq. (17) for calcium activation was partially phenomenological. That is, the term UH (UH < 0) was simply inserted into Eq. (17) in order to translate the steady-state ICa vs. VC hyperpolarized. curve to the left when the horizontal cell membrane potential is This effectively shifts the calcium current to more negative values, or equivalently, increases the inward calcium current into the cone. This formulation was motivated by the ephaptic hypothesis proposed by Kamermans and Fahrenfort (2004). Their conceptual model is based on the experimental results for goldfish data shown in Fig. 11 of Verweij et al. 27 (1996). In contrast, the modeling of the GABA mechanism, also in Eq. (17), is less phenomenological since it is based on the Hill equation, used here to characterize the biochemical release of GABA by the horizontal cells. The purpose of this section is to show that our phenomenological approach to model the ephaptic mechanism captures the qualitative features of the goldfish experiment and adds insight into how a hybrid mechanism may play a role in the feedback response. For both the GABA and ephaptic hypotheses, the background-induced hyperpolarization of horizontal cells shifts the voltage-dependence of the calcium current to more negative values. In the goldfish experiment, steady-state ICa vs. VC curves are plotted for a constant disk-shaped bright spot in the presence and absence of a full field background illumination (See Fig.11a in Verweij et al. 1996). After the introduction of the background illumination, inward cone calcium current increases. This results in a slight downward shift to the left of the I-V curve, accompanied by a very small upward shift in the right-most branch of the curve. In Fig. 13B, our simulation of the ephaptic-only case is consistent with a shift to the left. Note that this shift is approximately a pure translation of the curve to the left. The hybrid case, Fig.13A, displays a downward shift to the left. The GABA-only mechanism, Fig.13C, gives rise to a nonlinear downward shift for background-on. However, the downward shift is largest for the right-most branch. This shift is inconsistent with the experimental result. Finally, for the control case, Fig. 13D, where neither mechanism is present, there is no shift in the activation curve when the background is illuminated. It is instructive to point out that the control case can be deduced by solving for ICa in Eq. (17) after setting ∂ICa/∂t = 0 (steady-state) with = 0 = kG. The resulting expression 28 I Ca (V E ) gCa , (1 e ) (1 kOCa [G]) C Ca (VC A)/ B (23) depends only on the state variable VC, since setting kG = 0 fixes the concentration of GABA ([G]) and makes [G] independent of changes in UH. Therefore, changes in the steady-state value of UH, caused by background illumination, has no effect on Eq.(23) and this explains why there is no shift whatsoever in the ICa -VC curve in Fig.13D. In Fig. 11a of the experiment, the right-most branch of the curve corresponding to background illumination is slightly above (nearly overlays) the background-off curve, and the overall downward shift can be viewed as negligible. In our simulations, this would most closely resemble the ephaptic-only case, or a weak hybrid case that favors an ephaptic mechanism (kG small but nonzero). Our simulations predict that a GABA mechanism would have only a negligible influence on the feedback mechanism. The experimental results are consistent with our simulations. In the experiments, measurements were carried out in the presence of a high concentration of picrotoxin, which is a GABA A receptor agonist that blocks GABA A – receptor – mediated feedback responses (Verweij et al. 1996). Without GABA, the background- induced shift persisted. In both the hybrid and ephaptic-only cases, Figs. 13 A and B, the steep part of the left branch shows an increase in inward calcium current (ICa becomes more negative) when the background is turned on. In our model, when the background is turned on, the cone potential within the disk or center region does not change. The reason ICa changes is due to the spread of potential in the horizontal cell network, from the surround to the center region. That is, the feedback mechanism in the center region, driven by the horizontal cell potential, is responsible for the change in ICa. 29 The above observation is related to the classic center-surround antagonism experiments by Werblin and Dowling (1969). In these experiments, first the center is turned on, then during center stimulation the surround is turned on. In Fig. 14, a center spot is illuminated (t = 1000ms) for the hybrid case corresponding to Fig.13A. The horizontal cell hyperpolarizes as seen in Fig.14a. During center-on an annulus stimulus (surround) is then turned on (t = 3000ms). Figure 14A shows that the horizontal cell potential at the recording site (middle of the center region) further hyperpolarizes, this time due to the spread of potential through the horizontal cell network from the annulus region to the center region. In Fig.14B, at center-on, the inward calcium current decreases (ICa less negative), but when the annulus is turned on the inward calcium current increases (ICa more negative). This center-surround antagonism of ICa directly affects glutamate. Therefore, [GL] in Fig.14C also exhibits center-surround antagonism. 30 DISCUSSION We have formulated a partial differential equation system (Eqs. (14)-(21)) that includes the horizontal cell syncytium and its numerous processes within cone pedicles, and have compared simulation results with experimental data for square, slit, and disk test regions. Our goal in this paper was to test the validity of the GABA vs. ephaptic hypotheses by comparing simulation with experimental data for cat retina. We found that for square and slit stimulus regions an ephaptic-only mechanism for calcium entry is consistent with the temporal dynamics associated with background-induced flicker enhancement experiments in cat, whereas a GABA-only mechanism is not consistent with experiments. However, we did find that GABA was useful for modulating flicker enhancement in concert with the ephaptic mechanism. In fact, this hybrid mechanism incorporating both ephaptic and GABA kinetics best fit the experimental data. Figure 15 summarizes the hybrid mechanism’s simulated flicker-enhancement response for several of the state variables (square-stimulus only). To model the horizontal cell syncytium and its processes, we generalized a continuum spine formulation originally developed by Baer and Rinzel (1991) for dendritic cables with many spines. To justify the use of a continuum spine model for horizontal cells requires a sufficiently large spine density. Indeed, for cat retina we used a spine density of n ≈ 3.2 × 104 spines per electrotonic area. We also determined from the literature an estimate for the spine stem resistance of RSS 1300 M. A stem resistance this large suggests that the spine heads may be electrically isolated from the slab. Electrically isolated spines with excitable channels are capable of generating action potentials. During action potential generation the potential in the spine-heads is significantly different from the potential in the dendritic base, but during recovery, 31 or when the system is subthreshold, the potentials in the head and base are nearly equal (Segev and Rall 1988; Baer and Rinzel 1991). Although the retina model is technically nonlinear, the system behaves as though the membrane is passive and that is why in Fig. 15 the electrical potential in the spine heads UH closely approximate the potential in the slab VH. The relative error between the potentials can be deduced analytically from a simple reduction of the model equations. Consider Eq. (14) only for the passive membrane case (Iion = VH / Rm). The uniform steady-state of Eq. (14) reduces to RS n (UH - VH)/RSS = VH or in terms of the relative error between the two potentials, ( UH - VH ) / VH = RSS / (RS n ). Recall that the horizontal cell gap junction sheet resistance was RS 12M . Substituting the above estimates for RSS, RS, and n , the relative error is approximately 0.0034 or 0.34%. We found this value to be an accurate relative error estimate between UH and VH in computations using the full nonlinear model. In this paper we did not formulate a transfer function between light intensity and photocurrent density. Instead we roughly estimated the photocurrent density based on how the simulations fit the enhancement data. For example, in Fig.5 the amplitude of Iflick was chosen to be 7.15 A/cm2 (Aflick = -7.15), corresponding to a red 650 nm, 6.8 log quantam-2s-1 flickering square test stimuli. Likewise, we chose the magnitude of Ibkgd to be 7 A/cm2 (Abkgd = -7) corresponding to the diffuse background stimulus of wavelength 423 nm and irradiance 3.4 log quantam-2s-1. In the experiment that plotted enhancement vs. flicker frequency, the flicker irradiance was increased to 7.30 log quantam-2s-1 and the diffuse background irradiance was increased to 4.40 log quantam-2s-1. In Fig.7 we compensated for this increase in both the flicker and background irradiances by increasing the amplitude of Iflick to 7.7 A/cm2 and the magnitude of Ibkgd to 7.4 A/cm2 . Similar adjustments were made for the phase shift study. For slit test-regions, the only available experimental data was for the enhancement vs. flicker 32 frequency plot in Fig.4 of Pflug et al. (1990). In the experiment, the slit wavelength and irradiance values were the same as the square test-region values in Fig. 1 of the same paper. Therefore, for all slit simulations, we chose the amplitude of Iflick as 7.15 A/cm2 and the magnitude of Ibkgd as 7 A/cm2 . We found that an ephaptic-only mechanism was necessary for capturing major temporal dynamics of background-induced flicker enhancement. That is, when we removed the ephaptic mechanism by setting α = 0 in Eq. (17) for calcium activation, we could not reproduce the temporal dynamics observed in flicker-enhancement experiments. Setting α = 0 effectively decoupled the horizontal cell feedback network from the cone. In our formulation Ibkgd enters the cone directly rather than, for example, entering the cone as a surround or background current coming in through the horizontal cell network ( Ibkgd added to Eq. (14) instead of Eq. (21)). This leads to a subtle but surprising result. We have discovered that biasing the cone synaptic voltage directly with surround current can trigger enhancement provided a horizontal cell feedback network is attached to the cone. An equation for the rods would be necessary if the focus of this study was on the spatial properties of enhancement. The background current would then be moved from the cone equation to a new equation for the rods. Additional terms for the rod-cone gap junction would then be added to both the rod and cone equations. Furthermore, if hyperpolarized rods act globally to shorten the horizontal-cell length constant by uncoupling gap junctions, an additional equation for a time and space varying gap junction resistance may be needed as well. Although the focus of this study was on the temporal properties of enhancement it was necessary to reflect changes in stimulus geometry, size and flicker irradiance in order to compare 33 simulations with experiments. To compensate for these changes without over-complicating the model we introduced the desensitization factor γ. Recall that γ was defined as a lumped parameter that reduced the background current inside the stimulus region to account for both the saturation desensitization of rods when exposed to bright flicker and to a much lesser extent changes in the length constant due to background illumination. In a more complete model for the spatial properties, as described above, γ would be a computed value rather than a model parameter. We found that changes in γ were consistent with changes in stimulus geometry and flicker irradiance. When γ was tuned to fit the experimental data we assumed (a) a smaller stimulus region implies a smaller desensitization, which in turn implies a larger value of γ; (b) a larger flicker irradiance implies a smaller value of γ; (c) rod desensitization in a slit test region is larger than that in a square test region of the same width and flicker irradiance. The simulations in Fig.5 for background-induced flicker enhancement correspond to the experimental configuration of a 250-µm square test-region with a flicker irradiance of 6.8 log quanta ˖ µm-2 ˖ s-1 (Fig.1 in Pflug et al. 1990). Here we tuned γ = 0.2277 for a reasonable fit to the data. In Fig.7, for percent enhancement versus frequency, the stimulus size was reduced to a 250-µm square test-region but the flicker irradiance was increased to 7.3 log quanta ˖ µm-2 ˖ s-1 (Fig.3 in Pflug et al. 1990). Clearly, under assumptions (a) and (b), a smaller stimulus region and larger flicker irradiance are opposing effects: either γ increases, decreases, or remains relatively unchanged. Here, a reasonable fit to the data required an increase in the desensitization factor to γ = 0.2492. irradiance. Therefore, for this case, a smaller stimulus region dominates a larger flicker Finally, when changing from a 250-µm square test-region to a 250-µm slit test- 34 region, without changing the flicker irradiance, required a value of γ = 0.06 to obtain a reasonable fit to the data (Fig.1 in Pflug et al. 1990). This change is consistent with assumption (c) above. In this paper we took a phenomenological approach to model the ephaptic mechanism. Recall that the term UH (UH < 0) was inserted into Eq.(17) to translate the steady-state ICa vs. VC curve to the left when the horizontal cell membrane potential is hyperpolarized. Recently Gardner et al. (2013) tested the viability of the ephaptic hypothesis for a single synapse by means of detailed numerical simulations. They applied a drift-diffusion model including membrane boundary current equations to a two-dimension cross section of the triad synapse to demonstrate that the feedback can be strictly electrical. They found that the strength of the feedback response depended on the geometric configuration of the post synaptic processes within the triad synapse. The results of the drift-diffusion simulations suggest a way of modifying our model to represent the ephaptic mechanism more realistically. In the drift-diffusion simulations there were three distinct isopotential regions: the horizontal cell spine stem and head, and the intersynaptic space. Also, the intersynaptic space was isolated from the extracellular space by a high resistance pathway between the cone (or bipolar cell) and the horizontal cell. This high resistance pathway is analogous to the high resistance pathway produced by a spine neck. This suggests, for our model, to remove the UH term in Eq.(17) and add a new equation representing the intersynaptic space as an isopotential compartment separated from ground by a coupling resistance. Although the details need to be worked out, this new approach shows promise as a way to make the ephaptic component of our model less phenomenological. 35 Our simulations in Fig.5 demonstrated that our model captures ‘sag’ and post-inhibitory rebound dynamics similar to those observed in flicker enhancement experiments. In further testing of our model we found that when Iion and its auxiliary equations are removed the enhancement persists and the magnitude remains unchanged, indicating that ‘sag’ and postinhibitory rebound, in our model, can be unrelated to feedback. Some studies use the ‘sag’ or ‘rollback’ response of horizontal cells as an index of feedback (Kamermans et al. 2001; Vessey et al. 2005; Fahrenfort et al. 2009), whereas others contend that the ‘sag’ response is not a sensitive measure of feedback (Klaassen et al. 2011). Without adding any other new mechanisms to our model but removing Iion, we found that slowing down the GABA kinetics by making kG << 1 can cause ‘sag.’ However, we have ruled out this specific mechanism for ‘sag’ since it requires slowing down the GABA kinetics to speeds that are physiologically unrealistic. Whether or not ‘sag’ dynamics is related to feedback requires further study. Finally, we view our multiscale-continuum approach as a first step in formulating a multi-layer mathematical model (partial differential equation system) of retinal circuitry. In this study we have focused on the outer plexiform layer, but this model could be extended to include the other ‘brain nuclei’ within the retina: the inner plexiform layer where bipolar, amacrine, interplexiform, and ganglion cells interact. Modeling the inner plexiform layer will present new challenges. It is thicker than the outer plexiform layer, it has more synaptic contacts per unit area, and possesses a greater variety of chemical synapses and gap junctions. 36 APPENDIX In this APPENDIX we take advantage of the symmetry of slit, square, and disk stimuli to prepare Eqs.(14)-(21) for numerical and analytic study. For each stimulus geometry we formulate appropriate boundary conditions, explicitly define the functions that generate Iflick and Ibkgd, and specify the finite domain and boundary conditions for numerically integrating the system. Slit Stimulus Nelson (1977) employed slits of light of variable width and position to characterize the receptive fields of horizontal cells. The slit stimulus is convenient from an experimental and theoretical point of view. Nelson recognized that if the slit is long enough, current flow in the horizontal cell network is limited to one spatial dimension, namely perpendicular to the slit. To model the slit stimulus it is convenient to use rectangular coordinates in the xy-plane. In rectangular coordinates, ∇2VH = ∂2VH/∂x2 + ∂2VH/∂y2 in Eq.(14). An approximation that reduces the computational complexity of the problem is to assume that the flicker stimulus is applied over an infinite vertical strip (slit) of half width a. Consequently, VH and the other dependent variables are constant in the y-direction (assuming all parameters are constant and Ibkgd is constant in the y-direction). Therefore, ∂VH/∂y = 0 which implies that ∂2VH/∂y2 = 0, and Eq.(14) is replaced by 2 VH U VH 2 VH m RS n H I ion (VH , hV ) Rm . 2 t x RSS (A1) The other equations, (15)-(21), remain of the same form only now the state variables depend on x and t rather than on x, y, and t. This reduction to one spatial dimension yields the same solution as the two-dimensional problem with the advantage of saving considerable computation time 37 when solved numerically. Also note that Eq.(A1) has the same form as Baer and Rinzel’s equation for a dendritic cable studded with a continuum of spines (Baer and Rinzel 1991), allowing for some useful comparisons. To numerically integrate the reduced model using a finite difference method, we require the x domain to be finite; i.e.; -L ≤ x ≤ L, where L >> a. To reduce computation time, we take advantage of the symmetry about x = 0 and solve the problem over the interval 0 ≤ x ≤ L. We impose the following sealed end (homogeneous Neumann) boundary conditions: VH (0, t ) 0 x and VH ( L, t ) 0 . x (A2) At x = 0, the sealed end is required to preserve the symmetry. To generate the applied currents Iflick and Ibkgd, we first define an analytic approximation of the unit step function, namely H ( w, ) 1 tanh( w) , 2 (A3) where β is a parameter that controls the slope of the transition between 0 and 1 about w = 0. The function used to generate the “square” wave flicker stimulus in Eq.(21) is flick flick Aflick H ( z (t ), 1 ) H (a x, 4 ) for tbeg t tend I flick ( x, t ) , 0 for t elsewhere (A4) flick flick where Aflick is the amplitude of Iflick in the hyperpolarizing direction, and tbeg and tend are the beginning and end times of the flicker stimulus. The sine function, 2 flick z (t ) sin (t tbeg ) , P (A5) when inserted for w in the step function H, generates a smooth approximation of a square wave flicker stimulus of period P, as depicted in Fig. 3B. Parameter β1 in Eq.(A4) controls the slope 38 of the onset and offset of each flicker, and β4 controls the spatial slope of transition at the boundary of the stimulus region of half width a. The function used to generate the background stimulus is bkgd bkgd Ibkgd ( x, t ) Abkgd H (t tbeg , 2 ) H (tend t , 3 ) [ (1 ) H ( x a, 4 )] , (A6) where Abkgd is the hyperpolarizing amplitude of Ibkgd exterior to the stimulus region (x ≥ a), bkgd bkgd tbeg and tend are the beginning and end times of the background stimulus, β2 and β3 control the slope of the onset and offset of the background stimulus, and γ is the desensitization factor defined as the fraction to which Ibkgd is reduced within the stimulus region due to desensitization of rods when exposed to bright flicker. The last factor in Eq.(A6), [γ + (1 – γ) H(x-a, β4)], behaves as a smooth switch between γ for 0 < x < a, and 1 for x > a. Square Stimulus For a square stimulus region it is convenient to again use rectangular coordinates, but for this geometry we cannot reduce the model to one spatial dimension. Therefore, all state variables in Eqs.(14)-(21) are dependent on x, y and t, and in Eq.(14) we set ∇2VH = ∂2VH/∂x2 + ∂2VH/∂y2 . Here, Iflick is applied over a region centered at the origin and bounded by the sides x = ±a and y = ±a. To numerically integrate the system using a finite difference method requires that the spatial domain is finite. We choose this domain to be a square region bounded by x = ±L and y = ±L where L >> a. Just as for the slit stimulus case, we reduce the computation time by taking advantage of the symmetry about the x and y axes and solving the problem over the domain 39 bounded by x = 0, x = L, and y = 0, y = L. We impose homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions given by VH VH (0, y, t ) 0 and ( L, y, t ) 0 for 0 y L x x (A7) VH VH ( x, 0, t ) 0 and ( x, L, t ) 0 for 0 x L . y y (A8) and The function defining the flicker stimulus over a square region is a two-dimensional extension of Eq.(A4) given by flick flick A H ( z (t ), 1 ) H (a x, 4 ) H (a y, 4 ) for tbeg t tend I flick ( x, y, t ) flick , 0 for t elsewhere (A9) where H is defined in Eq.(A3) and z in Eq.(A4). The function used to generate the background stimulus is bkgd bkgd Ibkgd ( x, y, t ) Abkgd H (t tbeg , 2 ) H (tend t , 3 )[ (1 ) F2 ( H ( x a, 4 ), H ( y a, 4 ))], (A10) where F2 is defined by F2 ( p, q) | pq|| pq| . 2 (A11) When p = H(x − a, β4) and q = H(y − a, β4), F2 behaves as a two-dimensional smooth unit step function where F2 = 0 inside the square flicker region and F2 = 1 outside the region. Disk Stimulus The disk stimulus is a circular region of radius a centered at the origin. Like the slit stimulus, the model equations for the disk can be reduced to one spatial dimension. Here the 40 reduction to one dimension is appropriate if we assume that all the state variables and the initial conditions are circularly symmetric. That is, the variables are constant on each circle concentric with the disk, so that the solution to Eqs.(14)-(21) is fully represented along the radii r of the disk. For this circularly symmetric case ∇2VH = ∂2VH/∂r2 + (1/r) ∂VH/∂r, where r = (x2 + y2)1/2, and Eq.(14) becomes m VH 2V U VH 1 VH 2 ( 2H ) RS n H I ion (VH , hV ) Rm , t r r r RSS 0 r . (A12) The other equations, (15)-(21), remain of the same form only now the state variables depend on r and t rather than on x, y and t. The boundary condition at the origin requires that VH is bounded as r → 0+ . Likewise, VH is required to be bounded as r → ∞. In order to implement the finite difference method, we impose the finite domain 0 < r < R where R >> a. At r = R, we choose a zero-flux boundary condition in the radial direction. Although Eq.(A12) is singular at r = 0, a twice continuously differentiable solution does exist over the entire domain, including the origin. Therefore, to numerically approximate VH at the origin, it is necessary to discretize r over the grid points ri using half-steps. That is, we set ri = h/2 + ( i – 1) h , where h is the distance between grid points. As a consequence of the circular symmetry, the centered difference approximation for ∂VH/∂r is zero at the origin. A ghost (or fictional) half-step approximation of VH, in the negative r direction, is introduced for the centered difference approximation at r = 0. The flicker and background currents have the same functional forms as Eqs. (A4) and (A6), with r replacing x. One simulation of interest in this paper is the feedback-induced shift in calcium activation. Calcium current-voltage relationships are computed with a steady disk- 41 shaped center stimulus region in the presence and absence of a full field background illumination. Here the flicker stimulus Iflick is replaced by the steady stimulus Istdy defined by A H (a r , 4 ) I stdy (r , t ) stdy 0 stdy stdy for tbeg t tend . (A13) for t elsewhere The background stimulus Ibkgd remains of the same form as Eq.(A6) with r replacing x. GRANTS This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under grant DMS-0718308. DISCLOSURES No conflict of interest, financial or otherwise, are declared by the authors. 42 REFERENCES Anhelt PK, Keri C, Kolb H. Identification of pedicles of putative blue sensitive cones in human and primate retina. J. Comp. Neurol. 293: 39-53, 1990. Baer SM, Rinzel J. Propagation of dendritic spikes mediated by excitable spines: A continuum theory. J. Neurophysiol. 65: 874-890, 1991. Bank RE, Coughran WM, Fichtner W, Grosse EH, Rose DJ, Smith RK. Transient simulation of silicon devices and circuits. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design, CAD4: 436-451, 1985. Barnes S, Merchant V, Mahmud F. Modulation of transmission gain by protons at the photoreceptor output synapse. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 90: 10081-10085, 1993. Bear MF, Connors BW, Paradiso MA. Neuroscience: Exploring the Brain. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2007, p. 292-293. Belgum JH, Copenhagen DR. Synaptic transfer of rod signals to horizontal and bipolar cells in the retina of the toad (Bufo marinus). J. Physiol. Lond. 396: 225-245, 1988. Bouvier M, Szatkowski M, Amato A, Attwell D. The glial cell glutamate uptake carrier countertransports pH-changing anions. Nature 360: 471-474, 1992. 43 Byzov AL, Shurabura TM. Electrical feedback mechanism in the processing of signals in the outer plexiform layer of the retina. Vision Res. 26: 33-44, 1986. Corey DP, Dubinsky JM, Schwartz EA. The calcium current in inner segments of rods from the salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum) retina. J. Physiol. Lond. 354: 557-575, 1984. Dmitriev AV, Mangel SC. Electrical feedback in the cone pedicle: A computational analysis. J. Neurophysiol. 95: 1419-1427, 2006. Eysteinsson T, Frumkes TE. Physiology and pharmacological analysis of suppressive rod-cone interaction in Necturus retina. J. Neurophysiol. 61: 866-877, 1989. Frumkes TE, Eysteinsson T. The cellular basis for supressive rod cone interaction. Visual Neurosci. 1:263-273, 1988. Fahrenfort I, Steijaert M, Sjoerdsma T, Vickers E, Ripps H, van Asselt J, Endeman D, Klooster J, Numan R, ten Eikelder H, von Gersdorff H, Kamermans M. Hemichannelmediated and pH-based feedback from horizontal cells to cones in the vertebrate retina. PLoS One 4: ARTN e6090, 2009. Gardner CL, Jones JR, Baer SM, Chang S. Simulation of the ephaptic effect in the conehorizontal cell synapse of the retina. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics. 73: 636-648, 2013. 44 Goldberg SH, Frumkes TE, Nygaard RW. Inhibitory influence of unstimulated rods in the human retina: evidence provided by examining cone flicker. Science 221: 180-182, 1983. Golomb D, Wang XJ, Rinzel J. Synchronization properties of spindle oscillations in a thalamic reticular nucleus model. J. Neurophysiol. 72: 1109-1126, 1994. Hagins WA, Penn RD, Yoshikami S. Dark current and photocurrent in retinal rods. Biophys. J. 10: 380-412, 1970. Hirano AA, Brandstatter JH, Vila A, Brecha, NC. Robust syntaxin-4 immunoreactivity in mammalian horizontal cell processes. Visual Neurosci. 24(4): 489-502, 2007. Hirasawa H, Kaneko A. pH changes in the invaginating synaptic cleft mediate feedback from horizontal cells to cone photoreceptors by modulating Ca2+ channels. (J. Gen. Physiol.) 122: 657-671, 2003. Kamermans M, Fahrenfort I. Ephaptic interactions within a chemical synapse: hemichannelmediated ephaptic inhibition in the retina. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 14: 531-541, 2004. Kamermans M, Fahrenfort I, Schultz K, Janssen-Bienhold U, Sjoerdsma T, Weiler R. Hemichannel-mediated inhibition in the outer retina. Science 292: 1178-1180, 2001. 45 Kamermans M, Kraaij D, Spekreijse H. The dynamic characteristics of the feedback signal from horizontal cells to cones in the goldfish retina. J. Physiol. 534: 489-500, 2001. Kamermans M, Spekreijse H. The feedback pathway from horizontal cells to cones: A mini review with a look ahead. Vision Res., 39: 2449-2468, 1999. Klaassen LJ, Sun Z, Steijaert MN, Bolte P, Fahrenfort I, Sjoerdsma T, Klooster J, Claassen Y, Shields CR, Eikelder HMMT, Janssen-Bienhold U, Zoidl G, McMahon DG, Kamermans M. Synaptic transmission form horizontal cells to cones is impaired by loss of connexin hemichannels. PLoS Biology 9(7): e1001107, 2011. Kolb H. Connections between horizontal cells and photoreceptors in retina of cat – electronmicroscopy of golgi preparations. J. Comp. Neurol. 155(1): 1-14, 1974. Kolb H. The organization of the outer plexiform layer in the retina of the cat: Electron microscopic observations. J. Neurocytol. 6(2): 131-153, 1977. Kolb H, West RW. Synaptic connections of the interplexiform cell in the retina of the cat. J. Neurocytol. 6: 155-170, 1977. Kraaij DA, Spekreijse H, Kamermans M. The nature of surround-induced depolarizing responses in goldfish cones. J. Gen. Physiol. 115: 3-15, 2000. 46 Lamb TD. Spatial properties of horizontal cell responses in the turtle retina. J. Physiol. 263: 239-255, 1976. Lansansky A. Synaptic responses of retinal photoreceptors. In: Photoreceptors, edited by Borsellino A and Cervetto L, NY: Plenum, 221-231, 1984. LeVeque RJ. Finite Difference Methods for Ordinary and Partial Differential Equations: Steady-State and Time-Dependent Problems. Philadelphia: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2007. Löhrke S, Hofmann H-D. Voltage-gated currents of rabbit a- and b-type horizontal cells in retinal monolayer cultures. Visual Neurosci. 11: 369-378, 1994. Marc RE, Murry RF, Basinger SF. Pattern-recognition of amino-acid signatures in retinal neurons. J. Neurosci. 15: 5106-5129, 1995. Mathworks. MATLAB R2012b documentation: Solve initial value problems for ordinary differential equations . http://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/ref/ode23tb.html [2012]. Miller JP, Rall W, Rinzel J. Synaptic amplification by active membrane in dendritic spines. Brain Res. 325: 325-330, 1985. 47 Naka KI, Rushton AH. The generation and spread of S-potentials in fish (Cyprinidae). J. Physiol. 192: 437-461, 1967. Nelson R. Cat cones have rod input: A comparison of the response properties of cones and horizontal cell bodies in the retina of the cat. J. Comp. Neurol.. 172: 109-135, 1977. Nelson R, Pflug R, Baer SM. Background-induced flicker enhancepent in cat retinal horizontal cells. II. Spatial properties. J. Neurophysiol. 64: 326-340, 1990. Perlman I, Kolb H, Nelson R. S-potentials and horizontal cells. In: Webvision: The Organization of the Retina and the Visual System, edited by Kolb H, Nelson R, Fernandez E, and Jones B: http://webvision.med.utah.edu [2012]. Pfeiffer-Linn C, Lasater EM. Dopamine modulates in a differential fashion t- and l-type calcium currents in bass retinal horizontal cells. J. Gen. Physiol. 102: 277-294, 1993. Pflug R, Nelson R, Ahnelt PK. Background-induced flicker enhancement in cat retinal horizontal cells. I. Temporal and spectral properties. J. Neurophysiol. 64: 313-325, 1990. Rall W, Segev I. Functional possibilities for synapses on dendrites and on dendritic spines. In: Synaptic Function, edited by Edelman GM, Gall WE, Cowan WM. New York: Wiley, 1987, p. 605-636. 48 Raviola E, Gilula NB. Gap junctions between photoreceptor cells in the vertebrate retina. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., USA. 70(6):1677-1681, 1973. Schneeweis DM, Schnapf J. Photovoltage of rods and cones in the macaque retina. Science 268: 1053-1056, 1995. Schubert T, Weiler R, Feigenspan A. Intracellular calcium is regulated by different pathways in horizontal cells of the mouse retina. J. Neurophysiol. 96: 1278-1292, 2006. Segev I, Rall W. Computational study of an excitable dendritic spine. J. Neurophysiol. 60: 499523, 1988. Smith RG. Simulation of an anatomically defined local circuit: The cone-horizontal cell network in cat retina. Visual Neurosci. 12: 545-561, 1995. Smith RG, Freed MA, Sterling P. Microcircuitry of the dark-adapted cat retina: functional architecture of the rod-cone network. J. Neurosci. 6(12): 3505-3517, 1986. Spray DC, Ye Z-C, Ransom BR. Functional connexin ``hemichannels'': A critical appraisal. Glia 54: 758-773, 2006. Spruston N, Johnston D. Perforated patch-clamp analysis of the passive membrane properties of three classes of hippocampal neurons. J. Neurophysiol. 67: 508-529, 1992. 49 Steinberg RH. Rod and cone contributions to S-potentials from the cat retina. Vision Res. 9: 1319-1329, 1969a. Steinberg RH. The rod after-effect in S-potentials from the cat retina. Vision Res. 9: 13451355, 1969b. Steinberg RH, Reid M, Lacy PL. Distribution of rods and cones in retina of cat (FelisDomesticus). J. Comp. Neurol. 148: 229-248, 1973. Schubert T, Weiler R, Feigenspan A. Intracellular calcium is regulated by different pathways in horizontal cells of the mouse retina. J. Neurophysiol. 96: 1278-1292, 2006. Sullivan JM, Lasater EM. Sustained and transient calcium currents in horizontal cells of the white bass retina. J. Gen. Physiol. 99: 85-107, 1992. Schwartz EA. Calcium-independent release of GABA from isolated horizontal cells of the toad retina. J. Physiol. 323: 211-227, 1982. Schwartz EA. Depolarization without calcium can release gamma-aminobutyric acid from a retinal neuron. Science. 238: 350-355, 1987. Schwartz EA. Transport-mediated synapses in the retina. Physiol. Rev. 82: 875-891, 2002. 50 Ueda Y, Kaneko A, Kaneda. Voltage-dependent ionic currents in solitary horizontal cells isolated from cat retina. J. Neurophysiol. 68: 1143-1150, 1992. Verweij J, Kamermans M, Spekreijse H. Horizontal cells feed back to cones by shifting the cones calcium-current activation range. Vision Res. 36: 3943-3953, 1996. Vessey JP, Stratis AK, Daniels BA, Silva ND, Jonz MG, Lalonde MR, Baldridge WH, Barnes S. Proton-mediated feedback inhibition of presynaptic calcium channels at the cone photoreceptor synapse. J. Neurosci. 25: 4108-4117, 2005. Werblin FS, Dowling JE. Organization of the retina of the mudpuppy, Necturus maculosus. II. Intracellular recording. J. Neurophysiol. 32: 339-355, 1969. Williams RW, Cavada C, Reinososuarez F. Rapid evolution of the visual-system- A cellularassay of the retina and dorsal lateral geniculate-nucleus of the spanish wildcat and the domestic cat. J. Neurosci. 13: 208-228, 1993. Winslow RL, Miller RF, Ogden TE. Functional role of spines in the retinal horizontal cell network. Proc. Natl. acad. Sci. USA 86: 387-391, 1989. Yau KW. Phototransduction mechanisms in retinal rods and cones. Invest. Ophthalmol. Visual Sci. 35: 9-32, 1994. 51 FIG. 1. The dynamics of background-induced flicker enhancement. The left panels show simulated enhancement dynamics for square test-regions, the right panels for slit test-regions. A: The enhancement effect. The thin bar on the time axis denotes the duration of the flicker stimulus, the thick bar denotes the duration of the background stimulus. For both square and slit test-regions, the horizontal cell flicker response amplitude increases during background illumination. In addition, while the background is on, there is a slow repolarization or ‘sag’ effect, followed by an overshoot. Compare with Fig.1 in Pflug et al. (1990) for the experimental results. B: The “two-limb” feature of the percent enhancement versus frequency curves, for experiment (dotted) and simulation (solid). Data points for experiments obtained from Pflug et al. (1990). C: Background-induced phase shift in flicker waveform between a flicker cycle in the dark (solid) and a flicker cycle with background illuminated (dashed). Compare to Fig. 5 in Pflug et al. (1990). FIG. 2. Estimate of spine density and spine stem resistance for horizontal cell syncytium. A: Spiny processes emanate from the horizontal cell syncytium (stippled region), to form synapses with cones (not shown). The variables UH and VH denote the horizontal cell membrane potentials in the spine head and syncytium respectively. The spine density is estimated to be n ≈ 3.2 × 104 spines per electrotonic area, sufficiently large to justify a continuum spine formulation. B: Using the simplifying assumption that the spine stem is cylindrical with stem length Lss ≈ 5μm and stem diameter dss ≈ 0.1 μm, the stem resistance is estimated to be Rss ≈ 1300 MΩ. The electrical isolation caused by this large stem resistance is offset by the large spine density. Consequently, at a given location (x,y), UH and VH are approximately equal. See text for details of the above estimates. 52 FIG. 3. The functions used to define both Iflick and Ibkgd depend on the geometry of the stimulus region. The explicit forms of these functions, for slit, square, and disk test-regions, are given in the APPENDIX. Here we show, as an example, the time course and spatial dependency of the flicker stimulus and background illumination for a slit test-region. A: The flicker stimulus is applied over an infinite vertical slit (stippled) of half width a. B: The square wave flicker stimulus is plotted as a function of time. The minimum of each square wave is denoted by Aflick. We model the onset and offset of each wave cycle as a smooth sigmoidal transition, as shown in the magnified insets. C: The minimum of the square wave flicker stimulus as a function of x. Here, the insets magnify the smooth spatial transition at the boundaries of the stimulus region x = ±a. D: The background current Ibkgd is displayed as a function of time for both inside and outside the stimulus region S. The parameter Abkgd is defined as the minimum of Ibkgd outside of S. Inside S, we account for both the saturation desensitization of rods when exposed to bright flicker and changes in the length constant due to background illumination by changing Abkgd to γ Abkgd, where 0 ≤ γ ≤ 1. Note that the offset of Ibkgd is set slower than its onset to account for rod after-effect. 53 FIG. 4. Both ephaptic and GABA feedback mechanisms are modeled by Eqs. (14) - (21). Arrows numbered (1)-(8) summarize the dynamics underlying the background-induced flicker enhancement experiments. (1) Both flicker stimulus Iflick and background stimulus Ibkgd drive the cone membrane potential VC (Eq. (21)). The flicker stimulus, transduced by the cone, directly modifies the cone membrane potential, whereas the background stimulus, transduced by the rods, indirectly modifies the cone membrane potential via rod-cone gap junctions. In the background-induced flicker enhancement experiments, first the flicker stimulus is turned on until the system reaches steady-state oscillations. Next, the background stimulus is applied. (2) The background illumination further hyperpolarizes the cone resulting in a change in calcium activation (Eq.(17)). (3) When calcium current enters the cone ( ICa < 0 ) there is an increase in the release of transmitter glutamate [GL] into the synaptic cleft (Eq. (16)). (4) Glutamate depolarizes the already negative horizontal cell spine head membrane potential UH (Eq. (15)). (5) The spread of potential from other slab locations can also change VH and therefore UH (Eqs. (14) and (15)). (6) Under the ephaptic hypothesis, a depolarizing UH reduces the influx of ICa into the cone (Eq. (17)) and, via the feedback loop (6) → (3) → (4) → (6), drives UH in the opposite, hyperpolarizing direction. (7) Under the GABA hypothesis, a depolarizing UH increases the release of calcium blocker GABA (Eq. (18)), reducing the influx of ICa into the cone. Here, the feedback loop (7) → (8) → (3) → (4) → (7) drives UH in the opposite, hyperpolarizing direction. 54 FIG.5. Background-induced flicker enhancement (Square test-region). Each panel shows the simulated horizontal cell response (VH) to a flickering 16 Hz, 250-m square test-region stimulus (duration denoted by thin bar) and a superimposed steady background stimulus (duration denoted by thick bar). The strength of the feedback mechanisms is controlled by in Eq. (17) and kG in Eq. (18). Here, the desensitization factor is γ = 0.2277; other parameters are listed in Tables 1-3. Compare each panel to the experimental microelectrode record in Fig. 1 of Pflug et al. 1990. A: A hybrid of both GABA and ephaptic kinetics ( kG = 1, ) induces an enhancement of E = 99. B: For ephaptic-only kinetics (kG = 0, the enhancement is reduced to E = 87. C: The response for GABA-only kinetics (kG = 1 , ere, the enhancement decreases significantly to E = 22. D: When neither mechanism is present (kG = 0, the flicker response amplitude during background-on is less than that when the background is off, yielding a slightly negative enhancement of E = -0.75. This control case demonstrates that a feedback mechanism is necessary to significantly amplify the enhancement, and both ‘sag’ and post-inhibitory rebound dynamics are present when the feedback mechanisms are blocked. 55 FIG. 6. Background-induced flicker enhancement (Slit test-region). Each panel shows the simulated horizontal cell response (VH) to a flickering 16Hz, 250m slit test-region stimulus (duration denoted by thin bar) and a superimposed steady background stimulus (duration denoted by thick bar). Here the desensitization factor for the slit geometry is γ = 0.06. See Fig. 5 for other parameter values. A: The hybrid mechanism ( kG = 1, ) exhibits an enhancement of E = 37. This is the same case shown in Fig.1A right. B: The ephaptic-only case ( kG = 0, ) enhances the flicker to E = 32. C: The GABA-only case ( kG = 1, ) enhances the flicker to E = 35. D: When neither mechanism is present ( kG = 0, ), the enhancement drops to 23. The dynamics for all four cases are consistent with experimental microelectrode records for slit-stimuli described in the literature (Nelson et al. 1990). FIG. 7. Percent enhancement as a function of frequency (Square test-region). Each panel compares simulated percent enhancement (solid curves) with experiment (dotted curve) for a 150-m square test-region at different flicker frequencies. Here, = 0.2492, Aflick = -7.7A/cm2, and Abkgd = -7.4A/cm2. See Fig. 5 for other parameter values. This figure demonstrates that the hybrid and ephaptic-only mechanisms best fit the experimental data in Fig. 4 of Pflug et al. (1990). A: Hybrid ( kG = 1, ): This is the same case shown in Fig.1B left. B: Ephapticonly ( kG = 0, ). ( kG = 0, ). C: GABA-only ( kG = 1, ). D: Neither mechanism 56 FIG. 8. Percent enhancement as a function of frequency (Slit test-region). Consistent with Fig. 7 for the square-test region, the hybrid and ephaptic-only kinetics for the slit test-region provide the best fit to the experimental data in Fig.4 of Pflug et al. (1990). See Fig.6 for other parameter values. A: Hybrid ( kG = 1, ): this is the same case shown in Fig.1B right; B: Ephaptic-only ( kG = 0, ). C: GABA-only ( kG = 1, ). D: Neither mechanism ( kG = 0, ). FIG. 9. Flicker response amplitude decreases monotonically with increasing frequency. Simulations confirm the experimental result (Fig. 3 in Pflug et al. 1990) that although enhancement increases with frequency, the flicker response amplitudes both before and during the background presentation decrease monotonically. Same parameters as Fig. 7A: 150-m square test-region with a hybrid of both GABA and ephaptic kinetics. FIG. 10. Simulation of background-induced phase shifts (Square test-region). A flicker cycle in the dark (solid curve) is superimposed over a flicker cycle in the presence of steady background illumination (dashed curve). To facilitate the comparison, the peak-to-peak dark flicker response amplitude has been scaled to the peak-to-peak amplitude for background-on. Here, the horizontal cell is responding to a 17.39Hz, 424-m square test stimulus, with = 0.1915, Aflick = -7.7cm2, Abkgd = -7.25cm2. The remaining parameters are the same as in Fig.5. The A: hybrid (same as Fig.1C left) and the B: ephaptic-only case display phase shifts to the left, which are consistent with the experimental result (compare to Fig.5 in Pflug et al. 1990). In sharp contrast, phase shifts are to the right in C: GABA-only and in D: neither mechanism present. 57 FIG. 11. Simulation of background-induced phase shifts (Slit test-region). As in Fig.10, a flicker cycle in the dark (solid curve) is superimposed over a flicker cycle in the presence of a steady background (dashed curve). To facilitate the comparison, the peak-to-peak dark flicker response amplitude has been scaled to the peak-to-peak amplitude for background-on. For the slit test-region, the horizontal cell is responding to a 16Hz, 250m slit test stimulus. The remaining parameters are the same as in Fig.6. Consistent with Fig.10 for square test-regions, the A: hybrid (same as Fig.1C right) and B: ephaptic-only cases display phase shifts to the left, which are consistent with the experimental result for square test-regions (compare to Fig.5 in Pflug et al. 1990). In sharp contrast, phase shifts are to the right in C: GABA-only and in D: neither mechanism present. 58 FIG.12. Background-induced phase shifts depend on the rate of glutamate reuptake. Parameter values are the same as in Fig.10 (square test-region). Here the background-induced phase shifts of ICa , [GL] , and UH are compared for a ten-fold increase in the glutamate reuptake rate. As in Fig.10, a flicker cycle in the dark (solid curve) is superimposed over a flicker cycle in the presence of steady background illumination (dashed curve), and peak-topeak dark flicker response amplitude has been scaled to peak-to-peak amplitude for backgroundon. A: When neither mechanism is present (α = 0, kG = 0), increasing the glutamate reuptake rate by a factor of ten ( by dividing kCa = 15 and τGL = 18.18 in Eq. (16) by ten ) has no effect on the phase shift dynamics of inward calcium current ICa (left panels) . However, glutamate (middle panels) does show a change in phase shift dynamics corresponding to an overall decrease in concentration that is particularly pronounced during synaptic release (t > 35). The shift in [GL] causes a modest shift in phase of the UH trajectory (right panels). B: For ephapticonly kinetics (α =1, kG = 0) there is a significant change in the shift dynamics of ICa when glutamate reuptake is increased. It is most evident when the inward calcium current is decreasing (t < 30 or t > 40). The shift in ICa contributes to the large shift observed in both [GL] and UH : a shift larger than that observed when neither mechanism is present. 59 FIG. 13. Background-induced shift in calcium current (Non-flickering disk). Each panel shows the simulated steady-state dependence of cone calcium current ICa as a function of cone potential VC at the center of a constant (non-flickering) circular disk (spot) stimulus. The diameter of the disk is 65m, γ = 0.2676, and ICa represents the average current for a single synapse. Other parameter values are listed in Tables 1-3. The plot of ICa vs. VC for a spot stimulus with no background (solid curve) is superimposed over the curve for a spot stimulus with background illumination (dashed curve). A: Hybrid mechanism: Background illumination shifts the ICa vs. VC curve downward over the range -80 < VC < 0, allowing more calcium current to enter the cone. This feedback-induced shift is nonlinear in the sense that the shift is not purely a translation to the left of the original background-off ICa vs. VC curve. B: Ephapticonly: Here the shift is essentially a pure translation to the left of the background-off ICa vs. VC curve. Consequently, the inward calcium current is slightly decreased for -56 < VC < 0 but increased for -80 < VC < -56. C: GABA-only: The range of increased inward current is reduced to -60 < VC < 0 compared to that range in the hybrid case (A above). Unlike the ephaptic-only case there is no decrease in calcium current, but rather a pronounced increase in inward calcium current over the range -40 < VC < 0. D: Neither mechanism: In the simulation both the ephaptic and GABA mechanisms are blocked, resulting in no shift in calcium current. 60 FIG. 14. Both ICa and [GL] exhibit center-surround antagonism. For the hybrid case in Fig. 13A, a center (spot) stimulus of radius 50µm is applied for 1000 < t < 7000 ms. During center-on, an annulus stimulus of inner radius 60µm and outer radius 260 µm is applied for 3000 < t < 5000 ms. The magnitudes of both the center and the annulus stimuli are Astdy = -7 µm/cm2, otherwise Astdy = 0. Other parameter values are the same as in Fig.13A. A: At center-on (t = 1000 ms), the horizontal cell hyperpolarizes to VH -29.18 mV. When the annulus is turned on (t = 3000 ms) the horizontal cell hyperpolarizes further; sharply down to VH -32.40 mV. B: The calcium current ICa exhibits center-surround antagonism. At centeron, the calcium current changes from ICa -1.34 to -0.26 pA; an approximate 1.08 pA decrease in the inward current. However, when the annulus is turned on, the inward calcium current reverses direction and increases. C: Consequently, glutamate concentration [GL] also exhibits center-surround antagonism: the decrease in inward calcium current at center-on drives the glutamate concentration down to [GL] 3.77 µM, but at annulus-on the glutamate concentration reverses and increases to [GL] 8.29 µM. FIG. 15. Simulation of background induced flicker enhancement (Hybrid mechanism) for state variables VC , UH , ICa , VH , [GL] and [G]. Parameter values are the same as in Fig. 5A. The panels on the right demonstrate that the potential VH in the horizontal cell slab closely approximates the potential UH in the spine head, and that the time course for [G] is similar to both UH and VH . However, the time course of glutamate [GL] and the calcium current ICa are more similar to the time course of the cone potential VC . 61 Square test-region A Slit test-region -25 VH (mV) VH (mV) -25 -30 -35 -35 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 t (ms) experiment simulation 200 100 VH (mV) 0 5 experiment simulation 200 100 10 20 30 40 Frequency (Hz) -28 0 5 10 20 30 40 Frequency (Hz) -28 in the dark with bkgd -30 -32 -34 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 t (ms) 300 0 10 20 30 40 t (ms) VH (mV) Percent Enhancement 300 0 Percent Enhancement 0 B C -30 -30 -32 -34 50 Figure 1: in the dark with bkgd 0 10 20 30 40 t (ms) 50 60 62 Horizontal cell syncytium and spine processes UH x A VH dss B Lss 0 Figure 2: 63 y A B S -a x a 0 Iflick (µA/cm2) 0 Stimulus Region Aflick 0 0 Aflick Aflick 961 800 C t 965 900 992 t (ms) t 996 1000 1100 D (µA/cm ) 2 2 min Iflick (µA/cm ) 0 0 Aflick inside S γ Abkgd 0 Ibkgd Aflick 0 Aflick Abkgd outside S a -a -a a 1500 x (µm) 2000 2500 3000 t (ms) Figure 3: 3500 4000 64 Model variables with summary of feedback mechanisms (1) VC cone potential (mV) Iflick (mA/cm2) Ibkgd (mA/cm2) (2) ICa calcium current (pA) (3) Ephaptic (6) feedback (8) GABA [GL] glutamate (mM) feedback (4) UH membrane potential of HC spine head (mV) (5) VH membrane potential of HC slab (mV) Figure 4: (7) [G] GABA (mM) 65 Background-Induced Flicker Enhancement (Square test-region) E ≈ 99 -40 0 VH (mV) -30 -40 E ≈ 22 0 Ephaptic only -20 -30 E ≈ 87 -40 -50 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 GABA only C -20 -50 VH (mV) -30 -50 B Hybrid mechanism -20 0 -30 -40 -50 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 t (ms) 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Neither mechanism D -20 VH (mV) VH (mV) A E ≈ -0.75 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 t (ms) Figure 5: 66 Background-Induced Flicker Enhancement (Slit test-region) E ≈ 37 -40 0 VH (mV) -30 -40 E ≈ 35 0 Ephaptic only -20 -30 E ≈ 32 -40 -50 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 GABA only C -20 -50 VH (mV) -30 -50 B Hybrid mechanism -20 0 -30 -40 -50 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 t (ms) 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Neither mechanism D -20 VH (mV) VH (mV) A E ≈ 23 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 t (ms) Figure 6: 67 Percent Enhancement vs. Frequency (Square test-region) Percent Enhancement experiment simulation 200 100 0 -100 C Percent Enhancement B 300 Hybrid mechanism 5 10 20 30 40 200 100 0 -100 GABA only 5 10 20 30 40 Frequency (Hz) 300 200 100 0 -100 D 300 Percent Enhancement Percent Enhancement A Ephaptic only 5 10 20 30 40 20 30 40 300 200 100 0 -100 Neither mechanism 5 10 Frequency (Hz) Figure 7: 68 Percent Enhancement vs. Frequency (Slit test-region) Hybrid mechanism 100 0 -100 5 10 20 30 40 200 GABA 100 only 0 5 10 20 30 40 Frequency (Hz) 300 200 Ephaptic only 100 0 -100 D 300 -100 Percent Enhancement experiment simulation 200 C Percent Enhancement B 300 Percent Enhancement Percent Enhancement A 5 10 20 30 40 20 30 40 300 200 Neither mechanism 100 0 -100 5 10 Frequency (Hz) Figure 8: 69 Flicker response amplitude decreases as frequency increases -20 E ≈ 60 10 Hz E ≈ 115 20 Hz E ≈ 175 30 Hz E ≈ 290 40 Hz -30 -40 -20 VH (mV) -30 -40 -20 -30 -40 -20 -30 -40 0 1000 2000 3000 t (ms) Figure 9: 4000 5000 70 Background-induced phase shift (Square test-region) Hybrid mechanism -28 Ephaptic only -28 -30 VH (mV) VH (mV) in the dark with bkgd -32 -34 0 10 30 40 VH (mV) -32 0 10 20 30 40 t (ms) 0 Figure 10: 20 30 40 50 -30 -32 -34 50 10 Neither mechanism -28 -30 -34 -32 -34 50 GABA only -28 VH (mV) 20 -30 0 10 20 30 40 t (ms) 50 71 Background-induced phase shift (Slit test-region) Hybrid mechanism -28 Ephaptic only -28 -30 VH (mV) VH (mV) in the dark with bkgd -32 -34 0 10 20 30 40 50 -30 -32 -34 60 0 GABA only 20 30 40 50 60 Neither mechanism -28 VH (mV) -28 VH (mV) 10 -30 -32 -30 -32 -34 -34 0 10 20 30 40 t (ms) 50 60 Figure 11: 0 10 20 30 40 t (ms) 50 60 72 [GL] reuptake influences background-induced phase shifts [GL] (µM) -2 ICa (pA) -35 -36 Ephaptic only Increased rate of [GL] reuptake -34 [GL] (µM) 0 10 20 30 40 50 Increased rate of [GL] reuptake -27 0 3 -2 0 -1 -34 0 10 20 30 40 50 30 -1 Neither mechanism 0 10 20 30 40 50 [GL] (µM) ICa (pA) 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 0 3 UH (mV) -1 -2 B [GL] (µM) ICa (pA) -2 0 -27 UH (mV) ICa (pA) -1 in the dark with bkgd UH (mV) 30 0 UH (mV) A 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 t (ms) Figure 12: -35 -36 0 10 20 30 40 50 73 Background-induced shift in ICa (Non-flickering disk) A spot spot + bkgd 0 -0.5 nonlinear shift -1 -1.5 -2 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 D -80 -60 -40 -20 0 Neither mechanism 0 ICa (pA) ICa (pA) 0 nonlinear shift -1.5 -2 -100 pure translation -1 -2 -100 0 GABA only -1 -0.5 -1.5 C -0.5 Ephaptic only 0 ICa (pA) ICa (pA) B Hybrid mechanism -0.5 no shift -1 -1.5 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 VC rest potential (mV) -2 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 VC rest potential (mV) Figure 13: 0 74 Center-surround antagonism A VH (mV) -25 center on center + annulus on -29 annulus off -33 0 ICa (pA) B -0.5 -1 -1.5 -2 C [GL] (µM) 24 16 8 0 1000 3000 5000 t (ms) Figure 14: 7000 75 Background-Induced Flicker Enhancement (Hybrid mechanism) -25 UH (mV) VC (mV) 0 -50 -100 -35 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -1 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 -30 -35 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 25 2 [G] (µM) [GL] (µM) 0 -25 VH (mV) ICa (pA) 0 -2 -30 15 5 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 t (ms) 1.6 1.2 t (ms) Figure 15: 76 Table 1. Reference parameter values for model equations Symbol Reference value Ash 1.31 µm2 A -40.8 mV B 3 mV Cm 1 µF/cm2 α 0.88 λ 250 µm σh -2.4 mV τCa 5 ms τGL 18.18 ms τh 800 ms τm 7.5 ms τG 15 ms θh -30 mV ECa 120 mV ECl -65 mV Esag 120 mV ELC -68 mV ELH -60 mV [Gi ] 5 µM gCa 0.03 nS gsag 1.7 × 104 nS/cm2 gLC 1.5 × 105 nS/cm2 gLH 105 nS/cm2 Idark 6.4 µA/cm2 kCa 15 µM/pA kG 1 µM/mV kOCa 1 µM−1 ksyn 1.572 × 10−13 (Ω · µM)−1 L 1280 µm n 2.4 × 104 ni 1 T 310.15 K Rm 7500 Ω · cm2 Rs 12 MΩ Rss 1273.24 MΩ Parameter Surface area of horizontal cell spine head Shift potential in sigmoidal activation curve Scale potential in sigmoidal activation curve Membrane capacitance Dimensionless ephaptic feedback coefficient Length constant of the horizontal cell sheet Kinetic parameter in h equation for Iion Time constant for calcium entering the cone Time constant for glutamate release from cone Time constant in h equation for Iion Membrane time constant for horizontal cell membrane Time constant for GABA release Threshold of h∞ in h equation for Iion Reversal potential for calcium current Reversal potential for chloride current Reversal potential for the “sag” current Leak potential for cone Leak potential for horizontal cell Horizontal cell intracellular concentration of GABA Peak calcium conductance Conductance for the “sag” current Leak conductance for cones Leak conductance for horizontal cells Dark current into cone Scale factor for glutamate dependence on calcium Scale factor for GABA release from horizontal cell Binding equilibrium constant for GABA Scale factor for synaptic glutamate current Location of boundary condition for slit model Electrotonic spine density (# of spines for λ2 sheet area) Number of charges transported per GABA ion Temperature Passive membrane resistivity Gap junctional sheet resistance Spine stem resistance 77 Table 2. Initial value of each state variable Symbol VH UH VC [G] ICa [GL] hV hU Initial value -28.32 mV -28.24 mV -25.33 mV 1.629 µM -1.375 pA 20.62 µM 0.3321 0.325 State variable Horizontal cell slab membrane potential Horizontal cell spine head membrane potential Cone membrane potential Concentration of GABA released by horizontal cells Cone calcium current (ICa > 0 outward; ICa < 0 inward) Concentration of glutamate released from the cone Gating variable for the sag current in the horizontal cell slab Gating variable for the sag current in the horizontal cell spine heads 78 Table 3. Reference parameters for If lick , Ibkgd , and Istdy Symbol Af lick Abkgd Astdy β1 β2 β3 β4 P lick tfbeg lick tfend tbkgd beg tbkgd end tstdy beg tstdy end Reference value -7.15 µA/cm2 -7 µA/cm2 -7 µA/cm2 50 0.15 ms−1 0.01 ms−1 0.28 µm−1 62.5 ms 900 ms 4564.29 ms 2121.43 ms 3342.86 ms 900 ms 11564.29 ms Parameter Factor controlling amplitude of If lick Factor controlling magnitude of Ibkgd exterior to stimulus region S Factor controlling magnitude of Istdy (for disk) Dimensionless factor controlling onset & offset speed of each flicker Factor controlling onset speed of Ibkgd Factor controlling offset speed of Ibkgd Factor controlling spatial slope of If lick & Ibkgd across S boundary Period of “square” wave flicker stimulus Beginning of flicker stimulus End of flicker stimulus Beginning of background illumination End of background illumination Beginning of steady disk stimulus End of steady disk stimulus