-transparent.png){kind=logo}
In unequal alternating monocular exposure, each eye receives normal patterned input, but on alternate days and for unequal periods. This imbalance in stimulation produces a behavioral deficit for the less-experienced eye and alters the ability of that eye to activate cortical cells. To determine whether unequal alternating exposure also affects the sizes of cells in the lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN), we measured the cross-sectional areas of geniculate neurons in seven normally reared cats, 14 cats reared with equal alternating exposure, and 17 cats reared with unequal alternating exposure. We found that, in the LGNs of cats reared with unequal alternating monocular exposure, cells in layers that received their input from the less-experienced eye were smaller than those in layers that received their input from the more-experienced eye. This effect was restricted to the binocular segments of the nucleus, and the difference in cell size was a function of the imbalanced exposure, rather than the length of exposure per se. In control groups given balanced alternating exposure, cell size was not correlated with the length of daily exposure. In cats reared with unequal exposure, the change in cell size was greater in the nucleus ipsilateral to the less-experienced eye. Further, the size of the effect was correlated with the size of the imbalance imposed during rearing: Cats reared with a moderate imbalance (8 hours/day vs. 4 hours/day) showed less change in cell size than cats reared with a large imbalance (8 hours/day vs. 1 hour/day). These results are consistent with those of behavorial and physiological studies and strongly suggest (1) that unequal alternating monocular exposure affects the sizes of cells in the LGN by altering the normal competitive balance between the retinogeniculocortical pathways from the left and right eyes, and (2) that the contralateral pathway has some inherent advantage in this competition. We also found a slight shrinkage of cells in the LGNs of cats reared with equal alternating monocular exposure. Since this effect was restricted to the binocular segments of the nucleus, and was not related to the length of exposure given, it was probably caused by the imbalanced binocular competition that occurred during each day's monocular exposure.
S B Tieman, and
D L Nickla, and
K Gross, and
T L Hickey, and
N Tumosa
March 1983,
Journal of neurophysiology,
S B Tieman, and
D L Nickla, and
K Gross, and
T L Hickey, and
N Tumosa
November 1989,
Brain research,
S B Tieman, and
D L Nickla, and
K Gross, and
T L Hickey, and
N Tumosa
September 1985,
The Journal of comparative neurology,
S B Tieman, and
D L Nickla, and
K Gross, and
T L Hickey, and
N Tumosa
March 1982,
The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience,
S B Tieman, and
D L Nickla, and
K Gross, and
T L Hickey, and
N Tumosa
August 1977,
Brain research,
S B Tieman, and
D L Nickla, and
K Gross, and
T L Hickey, and
N Tumosa
October 1984,
The Journal of comparative neurology,
S B Tieman, and
D L Nickla, and
K Gross, and
T L Hickey, and
N Tumosa
February 1972,
The Tohoku journal of experimental medicine,
S B Tieman, and
D L Nickla, and
K Gross, and
T L Hickey, and
N Tumosa
January 1989,
Journal of neurophysiology,
S B Tieman, and
D L Nickla, and
K Gross, and
T L Hickey, and
N Tumosa
October 1978,
The Journal of comparative neurology,
S B Tieman, and
D L Nickla, and
K Gross, and
T L Hickey, and
N Tumosa
April 1984,
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,
