Melanopsin, ipRGCs and Neural Responses to Light

Discovery and anatomy

In 2002, recordings from rat retinal ganglion cells that project to the suprachiasmatic nucleus showed that they depolarised in response to light even when synaptic input from rods and cones was blocked. In the same year, melanopsin-containing ganglion cells were mapped in the mouse retina and shown to project to the suprachiasmatic nucleus, the intergeniculate leaflet and the olivary pretectal nucleus, the circuits for circadian timing and the pupil reflex.

ipRGCs make up a small fraction of all retinal ganglion cells, under a few percent in humans. They have large, sparse dendritic fields that tile the retina, so together they sample light across the whole visual field. Several subtypes are now recognised in rodents with different projection targets; the human classification is less complete. ipRGCs also receive rod and cone input through retinal circuitry, so their output combines their own slow melanopsin response with faster signals from the classical photoreceptors.

Sources: [1], [2], [5]

Spectral sensitivity: 480 nm in the dish, about 490 nm at the cornea

Human melanopsin expressed in cells is most sensitive to light at about 479 nm, in the blue to cyan region. Measured at the cornea of a living eye, the effective peak shifts to roughly 490 nm because the cornea and the yellowing crystalline lens absorb part of the shorter wavelengths before light reaches the retina. This pre-receptoral filtering increases with age, which is one reason the same lamp delivers different melanopic stimulation to a child and an older adult.

Melanopsin is also bistable: light of longer wavelengths can regenerate the pigment after it has absorbed a photon. This property has been proposed to explain surprising effects of red and amber light in some studies, including the unexpected benefit of a 620 nm notch filter in a migraine trial, but its practical consequences in humans are not settled.

Sources: [3], [4], [5], [6], [12]

How melanopic light is measured

The International Commission on Illumination standard CIE S 026:2018 defines five alpha-opic weighting functions, one for each photoreceptor class, including the melanopic function. Multiplying a light source's spectrum by the melanopic function gives the melanopic irradiance, often reported as melanopic equivalent daylight illuminance. The standard provides a common language for lighting and lens engineering.

Two cautions follow. First, the melanopic function describes the sensitivity of a pigment, not the response of a person; it does not predict sleep, mood or headache. Second, a lens that reduces melanopic irradiance has changed a physical quantity. Whether that change produces any biological or clinical effect is a separate question that requires its own evidence.

Sources: [7], [6], [5]

ipRGCs and photophobia

ipRGCs project not only to circadian and pupillary centres but also to the thalamus. In rats, ipRGC signals converge in the posterior thalamus on neurons that respond to stimulation of the dura and project to the cortex. In blind people with migraine, light still worsened headache when ipRGC function was preserved, but not when all light perception was lost. Together these findings made ipRGCs the leading candidate carrier of light into headache circuits, and reviews now describe them as playing a key role in photophobia.

Later work showed that cone pathways also contribute, particularly to colour-dependent discomfort, and that green light is the least aversive during migraine attacks. The field therefore describes photophobia as involving both melanopsin and cone signalling, converging on thalamic and cortical networks, with animal data stronger than human data.

Sources: [8], [9], [10], [11]

What this does and does not imply for optical filters

If ipRGCs carry light into discomfort circuits, reducing light near 480 nm is a plausible design target, and several lens concepts, including notch filters and dual-band designs, are built on that logic. The only randomized trial to test a 480 nm notch directly found that it was not better than a 620 nm comparator, although both helped. A filter can be designed to lower melanopic irradiance by a calculable amount; the clinical meaning of that reduction has not been demonstrated for any specific lens. Design rationale and clinical evidence should be kept in separate columns.

Sources: [12], [7], [10]

Evidence: established versus emerging

Established

• ipRGCs exist, express melanopsin, respond to light directly with peak sensitivity near 480 nm in vitro, and drive circadian entrainment and the pupil reflex.
• Pre-receptoral filtering shifts the effective melanopic peak to about 490 nm at the cornea and increases with age.
• CIE S 026 provides a standard method for calculating melanopic quantities of a light spectrum.

Emerging or unresolved

• The ipRGC to posterior thalamus route for light-exacerbated headache is based mainly on rat data with human observations.
• The functional consequences of melanopsin bistability in humans are unresolved.
• No lens designed around the melanopsin peak has shown a wavelength-specific clinical benefit in a randomized trial.

Questions and evidence-based answers

Continue reading

• Migraine and photophobia
• Photophobia overview
• Spectral transmittance and wavelength-selective filters

References

1. Berson DM, Dunn FA, Takao M. Phototransduction by retinal ganglion cells that set the circadian clock. Science, 2002. PMID 11834835.
2. Hattar S, Liao HW, Takao M, Berson DM, Yau KW. Melanopsin-containing retinal ganglion cells: architecture, projections, and intrinsic photosensitivity. Science, 2002. PMID 11834834.
3. Bailes HJ, Lucas RJ. Human melanopsin forms a pigment maximally sensitive to blue light (λmax about 479 nm) supporting activation of Gq/11 and Gi/o signalling cascades. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 2013. DOI 10.1098/rspb.2012.2987.
4. Qiu X, Kumbalasiri T, Carlson SM, et al.. Induction of photosensitivity by heterologous expression of melanopsin. Nature, 2005. PMID 15674243. DOI 10.1038/nature03345.
5. Lucas RJ, Peirson SN, Berson DM, et al.. Measuring and using light in the melanopsin age. Trends in Neurosciences, 2014. PMID 24287308. DOI 10.1016/j.tins.2013.10.004.
6. Schlangen LJM, Price LLA. The Lighting Environment, Its Metrology, and Non-visual Responses. Frontiers in Neurology, 2021. PMID 33746879. DOI 10.3389/fneur.2021.624861.
7. CIE S 026:2018 CIE System for Metrology of Optical Radiation for ipRGC-Influenced Responses to Light. International Commission on Illumination, 2018. (Cited by designation; licensed text not opened.)
8. Noseda R, Kainz V, Jakubowski M, et al.. A neural mechanism for exacerbation of headache by light. Nature Neuroscience, 2010. PMID 20062053.
9. Noseda R, Bernstein CA, Nir RR, et al.. Migraine photophobia originating in cone-driven retinal pathways. Brain, 2016. PMID 27190022.
10. Katz BJ, Digre KB. Diagnosis, pathophysiology, and treatment of photophobia. Survey of Ophthalmology, 2016. PMID 26875996. DOI 10.1016/j.survophthal.2016.02.001.
11. Burstein R, Noseda R, Fulton AB. Neurobiology of photophobia. Journal of Neuro-Ophthalmology, 2019. PMID 30762717. DOI 10.1097/WNO.0000000000000766.
12. Hoggan RN, Subhash A, Blair S, et al.. Thin-film optical notch filter spectacle coatings for the treatment of migraine and photophobia. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, 2016. PMID 26935748. DOI 10.1016/j.jocn.2015.09.024.