↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

A visual circuit uses complementary mechanisms to support transient and sustained pupil constriction

Overview of attention for article published in eLife, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
28 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
13 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
87 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 Mendeley
Title
A visual circuit uses complementary mechanisms to support transient and sustained pupil constriction
Published in
eLife, September 2016
DOI 10.7554/elife.15392
Pubmed ID
Authors

William Thomas Keenan, Alan C Rupp, Rachel A Ross, Preethi Somasundaram, Suja Hiriyanna, Zhijian Wu, Tudor C Badea, Phyllis R Robinson, Bradford B Lowell, Samer S Hattar

Abstract

Rapid and stable control of pupil size in response to light is critical for vision, but the neural coding mechanisms remain unclear. Here, we investigated the neural basis of pupil control by monitoring pupil size across time while manipulating each photoreceptor input or neurotransmitter output of intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs), a critical relay in the control of pupil size. We show that transient and sustained pupil responses are mediated by distinct photoreceptors and neurotransmitters. Transient responses utilize input from rod photoreceptors and output by the classical neurotransmitter glutamate , but adapt within minutes. In contrast, sustained responses are dominated by non-conventional signaling mechanisms: melanopsin phototransduction in ipRGCs and output by the neuropeptide PACAP, which provide stable pupil maintenance across the day. These results highlight a temporal switch in the coding mechanisms of a neural circuit to support proper behavioral dynamics.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 114 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 45 38%
Researcher 20 17%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Master 7 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 17 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 40 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 4%
Psychology 4 3%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 22 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 262. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 January 2024.
All research outputs
#137,268
of 25,253,876 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#292
of 15,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,755
of 330,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#12
of 323 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,253,876 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,483 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,753 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 323 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.