Exercise does not enhance short-term deprivation-induced ocular dominance plasticity: evidence from dichoptic surround suppression

An anti-Hebbian model for binocular visual plasticity and its attentional modulation

Monocular deprivation during the critical period impairs the cortical structure and visual function of the deprived eye. Conversely, transient occlusion of one eye in adults enhances the predominance of that eye. This counter-intuitive effect of short-term monocular deprivation is a form of homeostatic plasticity. However, whether this sensory plasticity requires attention, and the underlying neural mechanisms remain unclear. Here, through a psychophysical experiment, we demonstrate that the deprivation effect is dramatically attenuated in the absence of attention. We develop a neural computational model incorporating the Hebbian learning rule in interocular inhibitory synapses (i.e., anti-Hebbian learning) to explain the deprivation effect. Our model predicts both the boosting of the deprived eye and its dependence on attention. Moreover, it accounts for other forms of binocular plasticity, including plasticity observed in prolonged binocular rivalry. We suggest that short-term binocular plasticity arises from the plasticity in inhibitory connections between the two monocular pathways.

Attention enhances short-term monocular deprivation effect

Patching one eye of an adult human for a few hours has been found to promote the dominance of the patched eye, which is called short-term monocular deprivation effect. Interestingly, recent work has reported that prolonged eye-specific attention can also cause a shift of ocular dominance toward the unattended eye though visual inputs during adaptation are balanced across the eyes. Considering that patching blocks all input information from one eye, attention is presumably deployed to the opposite eye. Therefore, the short-term monocular deprivation effect might be, in part, mediated by eye-specific attentional modulation. Yet this question remains largely unanswered. To address this issue, here we asked participants to perform an attentive tracking task with one eye patched. During the tracking, participants were presented with both target gratings (attended stimuli) and distractor gratings (unattended stimuli) that were distinct from each other in fundamental visual features. Before and after one hour of tracking, they completed a binocular rivalry task to measure perceptual ocular dominance. A larger shift of ocular dominance toward the deprived eye was observed when the binocular rivalry testing gratings shared features with the target gratings during the tracking compared to when they shared features with the distractor gratings. This result, for the first time, suggests that attention can boost the strength of the short-term monocular deprivation effect. Therefore, the present study sheds new light on the role of attention in ocular dominance plasticity.

Negligible contribution of adaptation of ocular opponency neurons to the effect of short-term monocular deprivation

Introduction

Modeling work on binocular rivalry has described how ocular opponency neurons represent interocular conflict. These neurons have recently been considered to mediate an ocular dominance shift to the eye that has viewed a backward movie for long during which time the other eye is presented with a regular movie. Unlike typical short-term monocular deprivation, the visual inputs are comparable across eyes in that "dichoptic-backward-movie" paradigm. Therefore, it remains unclear whether the ocular opponency neurons are also responsible for the short-term monocular deprivation effect which is prevalently explained by the homeostatic compensation theory. We designed two experiments from distinct perspectives to investigate this question.

Methods

In Experiment 1, we mitigated the imbalance in the activity of opponency neurons between the two eyes during monocular deprivation by presenting video stimuli alternately. In Experiment 2, we directly evaluated the response of opponency neurons before and after monocular deprivation using SSVEP techniques.

Results

Consistent with each other, both experiments failed to provide reliable evidence supporting the involvement of ocular opponency neurons in the short-term monocular deprivation effect.

Discussion

Our results suggest that ocular opponency neurons may not play an essential role in the short-term monocular deprivation effect, potentially due to interference from the homeostatic plasticity mechanism.

Metaplasticity: Dark exposure boosts local excitability and visual plasticity in adult human cortex

An interlude of dark exposure for about 1 week is known to shift excitatory/inhibitory (E/I) balance of the mammalian visual cortex, promoting plasticity and accelerating visual recovery in animals that have experienced cortical lesions during development. However, the translational impact of our understanding of dark exposure from animal studies to humans remains elusive. Here, we used magnetic resonance spectroscopy as a probe for E/I balance in the primary visual cortex (V1) to determine the effect of 60 min of dark exposure, and measured binocular combination as a behavioural assay to assess visual plasticity in 14 normally sighted human adults. To induce neuroplastic changes in the observers, we introduced 60 min of monocular deprivation, which is known to temporarily shift sensory eye balance in favour of the previously deprived eye. We report that prior dark exposure for 60 min strengthens local excitability in V1 and boosts visual plasticity in normal adults. However, we show that it does not promote plasticity in amblyopic adults. Nevertheless, our findings are surprising, given the fact that the interlude is very brief. Interestingly, we find that the increased concentration of the excitatory neurotransmitter is not strongly correlated with the enhanced functional plasticity. Instead, the absolute degree of change in its concentration is related to the boost, suggesting that the dichotomy of cortical excitation and inhibition might not explain the physiological basis of plasticity in humans. We present the first evidence that an environmental manipulation that shifts cortical E/I balance can also act as a metaplastic facilitator for visual plasticity in humans. KEY POINTS: A brief interlude (60 min) of dark exposure increased the local concentration of glutamine/glutamate but not that of GABA in the visual cortex of adult humans. After dark exposure, the degree of the shift in sensory eye dominance in favour of the previously deprived eye from short-term monocular deprivation was larger than that from only monocular deprivation. The neurochemical and behavioural measures were associated: the magnitude of the shift in the concentration of glutamine/glutamate was correlated with the boost in perceptual plasticity after dark exposure. Surprisingly, the increase in the concentration of glutamine/glutamate was not correlated with the perceptual boost after dark exposure, suggesting that the physiological mechanism of how E/I balance regulates plasticity is not deterministic. In other words, an increased excitation did not unilaterally promote plasticity.

Quantitative interocular suppression in children with intermittent exotropia

Purpose

We have demonstrated that the depth of unbalanced interocular suppression can be quantified by balancing the interocular luminance differences required when both eyes are viewing simultaneously. In this study, we aimed to investigate the applicability of this method in children with intermittent exotropia (IXT), offering a quantitative assessment of interocular suppression in individuals with binocular imbalance. Additionally, we evaluated its association with the clinical characteristics of IXT.

Methods

Interocular suppression in IXT was quantitatively measured using a polarizer and neutral-density (ND) filters. The density of the ND filter was adjusted incrementally from 0.3ND to 3ND, with a step size of 0.3ND (a total of 10 levels). Our prospective study involved 46 patients with IXT (mean age: 10.12 ± 4.89 years; mean ± SD) and 24 normal observers (mean age: 7.88 ± 1.83 years).

Results

The suppression test exhibited good test-retest reliability, supported by statistical analysis. We observed more pronounced interocular suppression in individuals with IXT compared to controls. Notably, the magnitude of suppression during distant and near viewing significantly differed in IXT (1.55 ± 0.93 vs. 0.57 ± 0.64; Z = 4.764, p < 0.001). Furthermore, we identified a positive correlation between interocular suppression and data obtained from the Worth-4-Dot test. Additionally, interocular suppression showed a significant association with distance control scores.

Conclusion

Our novel test offers a convenient and reliable means to quantify interocular suppression in patients with IXT. The quantitative assessment of interocular suppression provides a sensitive tool to evaluate the clinical characteristics of IXT.