IOVS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hayes, B. P.
Right arrow Articles by Holden, A. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hayes, B. P.
Right arrow Articles by Holden, A. L.

Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Vol 27, 981-991, Copyright © 1986 by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology


ARTICLES AND REPORTS

A morphological analysis of experimental myopia in young chickens

BP Hayes, FW Fitzke, W Hodos and AL Holden

Devices that degrade vision were applied to the left eyes of 3-day old chicks. The dome device affected the entire visual field, and the arch device, only the lateral field. Control chicks wearing a circumorbital ring and untreated chicks were also examined. The dome device produced - 15D and the arch device -4D of mean refractive error, while the ring and untreated chicks were emmetropic. Morphological measurements were made from macrophotographs of the intact and hemisected eyes fixed as for electron microscopy. The effects of the devices were analysed from the mean differences between the left (treated) and right (control) eyes. Nearly linear growth of the normal eye was found during the period in which measurements were taken (age 20-55 days). The ring device did not affect eye growth. The arch device significantly increased the dorsoventral equatorial diameter of the eye. The dome device had the greatest effect, and resulted in increases in both axial length and equatorial diameter during the treatment period. Dome eyes had a bulging cornea, increased anterior chamber depth, more open angle, and greater corneal diameter than controls. The axial length and equatorial diameter of the posterior segment also were increased. Two inflammatory responses of the eye were found, particularly in dome eyes; about 50% of treated eyes exhibited choroidal swelling, and vitreal clouding was found less frequently. The association between inflammation and excessive accommodation in producing the observed changes is discussed.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1986 by the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology