Skip to main content
. 2020 Jan 22;40(4):796–810. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0455-19.2019

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Desensitized cone responses of G2 mice do not mask rod responses at the mesopic light levels used in this study. A, Optomotor contrast sensitivity of WT (black circles; n = 4) and G2 mice (red triangles; n = 6) plotted as a function of rod photoisomerizations. Grating parameters: ft = 3 Hz, fs = 0.128 cyc/deg. B, Optomotor contrast sensitivity of WT (black bars; n = 5), G2 (red bars; n = 5) and G1::G2 mice (blue bars; n = 6) measured at backgrounds levels of 1500 R*/rod/s and 50,000 R*/rod/s. Grating parameters: ft = 1.5 Hz, fs = 0.128 cyc/deg. C, Amplitudes of dark-adapted flash ERG b-waves as a function of R*/rod for WT (black circles; n = 5), G2 (red triangles; n = 6), G1 (green inverted triangles; n = 5), and G1::G2 mice (blue diamonds; n = 6). D, Magnitudes of the response at the fundamental frequency in the flicker ERG response of WT (black circles; n = 3) and G2 mice (red triangles; n = 3) in response to a 16 Hz sinusoidal stimulus, 100% in contrast and indicated mean retinal irradiance. Region between dashed lines represents the intensity range over which subsequent operant behavior experiments were performed. All mice were 2–4 months old.