Skip to main content
. 2006 Apr;90(4):472–479. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2005.082487

graphic file with name bj82487.f3.jpg

Figure 3 Comparison of the internal radius of AF rings with the mean mf ERG P1 amplitude for each of stimulus rings 2 and 3 (A) and rings 4 and 5 (B). All but 2/20 AF rings had internal radii within the annular stimulus area of ring 2 (A). Inset in (B) shows the numbering and concentric arrangement of hexagonal rings; actual stimulus dimensions are shown in figure 4.