Photoresponse diversity among the five types of intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells

Key points Intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) are a rare population of retinal output neurons that drives subconscious physiological responses to light, e.g. pupillary constriction, synchronization of daily rhythms to the light–dark cycle and regulation of hormone secretion. This study investigated the functional diversity among the five known types of ipRGCs, named M1–M5. We found that M2–M5 cells could detect spatial differences in light intensity, implicating an ability to analyse the form of visual stimuli. All five ipRGC types responded robustly to moving lights, and M1–M4 cells appeared to respond optimally to different speeds, suggesting they might analyse the speed of motion. M1–M4 cells were shown to project to the superior colliculus, a brain area known to detect novel objects in the visual scene, suggesting that the form and motion information signalled by these four types of ipRGCs could contribute to this visual function.Abstract Intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) mediate non‐image‐forming visual responses, including pupillary constriction, circadian photoentrainment and suppression of pineal melatonin secretion. Five morphological types of ipRGCs, M1–M5, have been identified in mice. In order to understand their functions better, we studied the photoresponses of all five cell types, by whole‐cell recording from fluorescently labelled ipRGCs visualized using multiphoton microscopy. All ipRGC types generated melanopsin‐based (‘intrinsic’) as well as synaptically driven (‘extrinsic’) light responses. The intrinsic photoresponses of M1 cells were lower threshold, higher amplitude and faster than those of M2–M5. The peak amplitudes of extrinsic light responses differed among the ipRGC types; however, the responses of all cell types had comparable thresholds, kinetics and waveforms, and all cells received rod input. While all five types exhibited inhibitory amacrine‐cell and excitatory bipolar‐cell inputs from the ‘on’ channel, M1 and M3 received additional ‘off’‐channel inhibition, possibly through their ‘off’‐sublamina dendrites. The M2–M5 ipRGCs had centre–surround‐organized receptive fields, implicating a capacity to detect spatial contrast. In contrast, the receptive fields of M1 cells lacked surround antagonism, which might be caused by the surround of the inhibitory input nullifying the surround of the excitatory input. All ipRGCs responded robustly to a wide range of motion speeds, and M1–M4 cells appeared tuned to different speeds, suggesting that they might analyse the speed of motion. Retrograde labelling revealed that M1–M4 cells project to the superior colliculus, suggesting that the contrast and motion information signalled by these cells could be used by this sensorimotor area to detect novel objects and motion in the visual field.