Source 1primary paper2016Journal of Vision
Toolkit/five-primary photostimulator
five-primary photostimulator
Taxonomy: Technique Branch / Method. Workflows sit above the mechanism and technique branches rather than replacing them.
Summary
The five-primary photostimulator is a light-delivery assay method that generates stimuli to selectively modulate melanopsin, rod, and S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation or combination. It was used to measure human flicker pupillary responses and to examine how luminance and chromatic signals interact with melanopsin in control of the pupil light response.
Usefulness & Problems
Why this is useful
This method is useful for functionally probing the relative contributions of individual photoreceptor classes to human pupil responses under controlled stimulus conditions. By enabling isolated or combinatorial modulation of melanopsin, rods, and cone classes, it supports experiments on photoreceptor-specific and mixed-input visual signaling.
Problem solved
It addresses the experimental problem of delivering light stimuli that differentially drive melanopsin, rod, and S-, M-, and L-cone excitations while measuring pupil behavior. This allows assessment of how luminance and chromatic signals interact with melanopsin in the pupil light response.
Problem links
Need precise spatiotemporal control with light input
DerivedThe five-primary photostimulator is a light-delivery assay method that generates stimuli to selectively modulate melanopsin, rod, and S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation or combination. It was used to measure human flicker pupillary responses and to probe how luminance and chromatic signals interact with melanopsin in control of the pupil light response.
Taxonomy & Function
Primary hierarchy
Technique Branch
Method: A concrete measurement method used to characterize an engineered system.
Mechanisms
combinatorial photoreceptor modulationcombinatorial photoreceptor modulationnonlinear signal integrationnonlinear signal integrationselective photoreceptor excitationselective photoreceptor excitationTarget processes
No target processes tagged yet.
Input: Light
Implementation Constraints
cofactor dependency: requires exogenous cofactorencoding mode: genetically encodedimplementation constraint: context specific validationimplementation constraint: spectral hardware requirementoperating role: sensor
The method uses light stimuli generated by a five-primary photostimulator to selectively modulate melanopsin, rod, and S-, M-, and L-cone excitations. The available evidence supports application in human pupillometry, but it does not specify device architecture, stimulus wavelengths, irradiance ranges, or calibration requirements.
The supplied evidence is limited to a single 2016 Journal of Vision study focused on human flicker pupillary responses. No additional information is provided here on hardware configuration, spectral primaries, calibration procedures, temporal limits, or validation in other assays or organisms.
Validation
Cell-freeBacteriaMammalianMouseHumanTherapeuticIndep. Replication
Supporting Sources
Ranked Claims
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Approval Evidence
1 source5 linked approval claimsfirst-pass slug five-primary-photostimulator
stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations
Source:
adaptation behaviorsupports
Light adaptation behavior for melanopsin, rod, and cone signal conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
The results showed that light adaptation behavior for all conditions was weaker than typical Weber adaptation.
Source:
measurement methodsupports
The study measured human flicker pupillary responses using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, and cone excitations in isolation or combination.
This study reports human flicker pupillary responses measured using stimuli generated with a five-primary photostimulator that selectively modulated melanopsin, rod, S-, M-, and L-cone excitations in isolation, or in combination to produce postreceptoral signals.
Source:
relative contributionsupports
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
The melanopsin contribution to phasic pupil responses was lower than luminance contributions, but much higher than S-cone contributions.
Source:
signal integrationsupports
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted nonlinearly with melanopsin activation in a winner-takes-all manner, suggesting a postretinal integration site for parvocellular signals.
Chromatic red-green modulation interacted with melanopsin activation nonlinearly as described by a "winner-takes-all" process, suggesting the integration with PC signals might be mediated by a postretinal site.
Source:
signal integrationsupports
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting retinal integration with magnocellular and koniocellular signals.
Melanopsin activation combined linearly with luminance, S-cone, and rod inputs, suggesting the locus of integration with MC and KC signals was retinal.
Source:
Comparisons
Source-backed strengths
The reported strength is selective modulation of five photoreceptor classes, including melanopsin, rods, and the three cone classes, either alone or in combination. In the cited study, this capability supported measurement of human flicker pupillary responses and estimation of relative signal contributions, including a melanopsin contribution that was lower than luminance contributions but higher than S-cone contributions.
Compared with native green gel system
five-primary photostimulator and native green gel system address a similar problem space.
Shared frame: same top-level item type; same primary input modality: light
Relative tradeoffs: looks easier to implement in practice; may avoid an exogenous cofactor requirement.
Compared with open-source microplate reader
five-primary photostimulator and open-source microplate reader address a similar problem space.
Shared frame: same top-level item type; same primary input modality: light
Relative tradeoffs: looks easier to implement in practice; may avoid an exogenous cofactor requirement.
Compared with plant transcriptome profiling
five-primary photostimulator and plant transcriptome profiling address a similar problem space.
Shared frame: same top-level item type; same primary input modality: light
Relative tradeoffs: looks easier to implement in practice; may avoid an exogenous cofactor requirement.
Ranked Citations
- 1.