Advertisement

Structure of the Retina in Pacific Ocean Salmon Fry in Conditions of Crepuscular Illumination during Geomagnetic Field Changes

  • A. A. Maksimovich
  • V. P. Gnyubkina
Article
  • 37 Downloads

The retinomotor response of the retina was studied in Pacific Ocean masu salmon Oncorhynchus masou in conditions of mesopic (crepuscular) illumination with experimental compensation of the geomagnetic field (GMF) using a Helmholtz coil. In controls, the retinomotor response of masu fry to crepuscular illumination was normal: the nuclei of neurosensory rod cells were positioned immediately beneath the external limiting membrane and the nuclei of neurosensory cone cells were located closer to the pigment epithelium layer. In conditions of experimental compensation of the GMF, the retinal response of masu fry was altered: the nuclei of neurosensory cone cells were adjacent to the external limiting membrane, while rod nuclei were close to the pigment epithelium layer. Double and central neurosensory cone cells occupied a position inappropriate to the normal response to twilight: the bodies of these cells were significantly lengthened and their outer segments reached the pigmented epithelium layer. Thus, experiments using compensation of the GMF identified an unusual structure for the retina, which only partially corresponded to the response to mesopic adaptation. These data led to the conclusion that visible light is not the only variety of electromagnetic field perceptible to the retina in fish.

Key words

retina retinomotor response light-dependent magnetoreception geomagnetic field Pacific Ocean salmon 

References

  1. 1.
    E. O. Zagalskaya, “Ultrastructure of melanocytes in the retina and vascular sheaths of the eye in Pacific Ocean salmon,” Tsitologiya, 43, No. 11, 1013–1020 (2001).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. O. Zagalskaya, V. P. Gnyubkina, and A. A. Maksimovich, “Morphological changes in the retina of young masu salmon (Oncorhynchus masou) in experimentally altered magnetic fields,” Morfologiya, 125, No. 2, 47–51 (2004).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    E. O. Zagalskaya, V. P. Gnyubkina, and A. A. Maksimovich, “Morphological features of the retinomotor reaction in young masu salmon (Oncorhynchus masou) in magnetic fields and red light,” Morfologiya, 125, No. 6, 32–36 (2004).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. A. Maksimovich and E. O. Zagalskaya, “Effects of weak magnetic fields on retinal photoreceptors in fish,” Biofizika, 52, No. 5, 916–923 (2007).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. A. Maksimovich, S. L. Kondrashev, and V. P. Gnyubkina, “Morphological changes in the retina of young Pacific Ocean salmon (Oncorhynchus masou) in response to compensation of the geomagnetic fields in conditions of normal illumination,” Morfologiya, 132, No. 4, 44–51 (2007).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. A. Maksimovich, A. A. Kudra, and V. M. Serkov, “Morphological changes in the retina of young masu salmon (Oncorhynchus masou) in experimentally altered magnetic fields,” Tsitologiya, 44, No. 2, 140–149 (2002).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. A. Ostrovskii and A. E. Dontsov, “Physiological functions of melanin in the body,” Fiziol. Cheloveka, 11, No. 4, 671–678 (1985).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. A. Ali, “Histophysiological studies on the juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) retina. Responses to light intensities, wavelengths, temperatures and continuous light or dark,” Can. J. Zool., 39, 511–526 (1961).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. Demaine and P. Semm, “The avian pineal gland as an independent magnetic sensor,” Neurosci. Lett., 62, No. 1, 119–122 (1985).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. E. Deutschlander, J. B. Phillips, and S. C. Borland, “The case for light-dependent magnetic orientation in animals,” J. Exp. Biol., 202, 891–908 (1999).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    K. J. Lohmann and S. Johnsen, “The neurobiology of magnetoreception in vertebrate animals,” Trends Neurosci., 23, 153–159 (2000).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. D. Ransden, L. Anderson, M. Mussi, et al., “Retinal processing and opponent mechanisms mediating ultraviolet polarization sensitivity in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss),”J. Exp. Biol., 211, 1376–1385 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    P. Semm, D. Nohr, C. Demaine, and W. Wiltschko, “Neural basis of the magnetic compass: interaction of visual, magnetic and vestibular inputs in the pigeon’s brain,” J. Comp. Physiological. Ser. A, 155, 283–288 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. Wiltschko and W. Wiltschko, “Magnetic orientation in animals,” Zoophysiology, Vol. 33, Springer Verlag, Berlin, (1995).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Physiology Laboratory (Director: Master of Biological Sciences S. L. Kondrashev), A. V. Zhirmunskii Institute of Marine Biology, Far Eastern BranchRussian Academy of SciencesVladivostokRussia

Personalised recommendations