A kinetic analysis of mouse rod and cone photoreceptor responses.

key pointsMost vertebrate eyes have rods for dim-light vision and cones for brighter light and higher temporal sensitivity. Rods evolved from cone-like precursors through expression of different transduction genes or the same genes at different expression levels, but we do not know which molecular differences were most important. We approached this problem by analysing rod and cone responses with the same model but with different values for model parameters. We showed that, in addition to outer-segment volume, the most important differences between rods and cones are: (1) decreased transduction gain, reflecting smaller amplification in the G-protein cascade; (2) a faster rate of turnover of the second messenger cGMP in darkness; and (3) an accelerated rate of decay of the effector enzyme phosphodiesterase and perhaps also of activated visual pigment. We believe our analysis has identified the principal alterations during evolution responsible for the duplex retina. ABSTRACT: Most vertebrates have rod and cone photoreceptors, which differ in their sensitivity and response kinetics. We know that rods evolved from cone-like precursors through the expression of different transduction genes or the same genes at different levels, but we do not know which molecular differences were most important. We have approached this problem in mouse retina by analysing the kinetic differences between rod flash responses and recent voltage-clamp recordings of cone flash responses, using a model incorporating the principal features of photoreceptor transduction. We apply a novel method of analysis using the log-transform of the current, and we ask which of the model's dynamic parameters need be changed to transform the flash response of a rod into that of a cone. The most important changes are a decrease in the gain of the response, reflecting a reduction in amplification of the transduction cascade; an increase in the rate of turnover of cGMP in darkness; and an increase in the rate of decay of activated phosphodiesterase, with perhaps also an increase in the rate of decay of light-activated visual pigment. Although we cannot exclude other differences, and in particular alterations in the Ca