An arbitrary-spectrum spatial visual stimulator for vision research

Abstract

Visual neuroscientists require accurate control of visual stimulation. However, few stimulator solutions simultaneously offer high spatio-temporal resolution and free control over the spectra of the light sources, because they rely on off-the-shelf technology developed for human trichromatic vision. Importantly, consumer displays fail to drive UV-shifted short wavelength-sensitive photoreceptors, which strongly contribute to visual behaviour in many animals, including mice, zebrafish and fruit flies. Moreover, many non-mammalian species feature more than three spectral photoreceptor types. Here, we present a flexible, spatial visual stimulator with up to 6 arbitrary spectrum chromatic channels. It combines a standard digital light processing engine with open source hard- and software that can be easily adapted to the experimentalist's needs. We demonstrate the capability of this general visual stimulator experimentally in the in vitro mouse retinal whole-mount and the in vivo zebrafish. With this work, we intend to start a community effort of sharing and developing a common stimulator design for vision research.

Data availability

Part lists are provided in Tables 1-3 and Suppl. Table S1. Software scripts for stimulus calibration as well as design files for circuit boards and 3D-printed parts are provided at https://github.com/eulerlab/open-visual-stimulator. The visual stimulation software is provided at https://github.com/eulerlab/QDSpy.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Katrin Franke

    Institute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. André Maia Chagas

    Institute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Zhijian Zhao

    Institute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3302-1495
  4. Maxime JY Zimmermann

    School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Philipp Bartel

    School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Yongrong Qiu

    Institute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Klaudia P Szatko

    Institute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Tom Baden

    Institute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Thomas Euler

    Institute for Ophthalmic Research, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
    For correspondence
    thomas.euler@cin.uni-tuebingen.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4567-6966

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (FKZ: 01GQ1002)

  • Katrin Franke

Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (M.FE.A.KYBE0004)

  • Katrin Franke

European Commission (ERC-StG 'NeuroVisEco' 677687)

  • Tom Baden

Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 674901)

  • Tom Baden
  • Thomas Euler

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/R014817/1)

  • Tom Baden

Leverhulme Trust (PLP-2017-005)

  • Tom Baden

Lister Institute of Preventive Medicine

  • Tom Baden

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Projektnummer 276693517 - SFB 1233)

  • Thomas Euler

Medical Research Council (MC_PC_15071)

  • Tom Baden

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Alexander Borst, Max Planck Institute of Neurobiology, Germany

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All animal procedures adhered to the laws governing animal experimentation issued by the GermanGovernment (mouse) or all procedures were performed in accordance with the UK Animals (ScientificProcedures) act 1986 and approved by the animal welfare committee of the University of Sussex(zebrafish larvae).

Version history

  1. Received: May 24, 2019
  2. Accepted: September 20, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: September 23, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: October 8, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2019, Franke et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 4,403
    Page views
  • 556
    Downloads
  • 38
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Scopus, Crossref, PubMed Central.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Katrin Franke
  2. André Maia Chagas
  3. Zhijian Zhao
  4. Maxime JY Zimmermann
  5. Philipp Bartel
  6. Yongrong Qiu
  7. Klaudia P Szatko
  8. Tom Baden
  9. Thomas Euler
(2019)
An arbitrary-spectrum spatial visual stimulator for vision research
eLife 8:e48779.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.48779

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.48779

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Kiwamu Kudo, Kamalini G Ranasinghe ... Srikantan S Nagarajan
    Research Article

    Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is characterized by the accumulation of amyloid-β and misfolded tau proteins causing synaptic dysfunction, and progressive neurodegeneration and cognitive decline. Altered neural oscillations have been consistently demonstrated in AD. However, the trajectories of abnormal neural oscillations in AD progression and their relationship to neurodegeneration and cognitive decline are unknown. Here, we deployed robust event-based sequencing models (EBMs) to investigate the trajectories of long-range and local neural synchrony across AD stages, estimated from resting-state magnetoencephalography. The increases in neural synchrony in the delta-theta band and the decreases in the alpha and beta bands showed progressive changes throughout the stages of the EBM. Decreases in alpha and beta band synchrony preceded both neurodegeneration and cognitive decline, indicating that frequency-specific neuronal synchrony abnormalities are early manifestations of AD pathophysiology. The long-range synchrony effects were greater than the local synchrony, indicating a greater sensitivity of connectivity metrics involving multiple regions of the brain. These results demonstrate the evolution of functional neuronal deficits along the sequence of AD progression.

    1. Medicine
    2. Neuroscience
    Luisa Fassi, Shachar Hochman ... Roi Cohen Kadosh
    Research Article

    In recent years, there has been debate about the effectiveness of treatments from different fields, such as neurostimulation, neurofeedback, brain training, and pharmacotherapy. This debate has been fuelled by contradictory and nuanced experimental findings. Notably, the effectiveness of a given treatment is commonly evaluated by comparing the effect of the active treatment versus the placebo on human health and/or behaviour. However, this approach neglects the individual’s subjective experience of the type of treatment she or he received in establishing treatment efficacy. Here, we show that individual differences in subjective treatment - the thought of receiving the active or placebo condition during an experiment - can explain variability in outcomes better than the actual treatment. We analysed four independent datasets (N = 387 participants), including clinical patients and healthy adults from different age groups who were exposed to different neurostimulation treatments (transcranial magnetic stimulation: Studies 1 and 2; transcranial direct current stimulation: Studies 3 and 4). Our findings show that the inclusion of subjective treatment can provide a better model fit either alone or in interaction with objective treatment (defined as the condition to which participants are assigned in the experiment). These results demonstrate the significant contribution of subjective experience in explaining the variability of clinical, cognitive, and behavioural outcomes. We advocate for existing and future studies in clinical and non-clinical research to start accounting for participants’ subjective beliefs and their interplay with objective treatment when assessing the efficacy of treatments. This approach will be crucial in providing a more accurate estimation of the treatment effect and its source, allowing the development of effective and reproducible interventions.