DeVoe R D, de Souza J M, Ventura D F
School of Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington 47409, USA.
Braz J Med Biol Res. 1997 Feb;30(2):169-77. doi: 10.1590/s0100-879x1997000200003.
Spectral sensitivities of visual systems are specified as the reciprocals of the intensities of light (quantum fluxes) needed at each wavelength to elicit the same criterion amplitude of responses. The review primarily considers the methods that have been developed for electrophysiological determinations of criterion amplitudes of slow-wave responses from single retinal cells. Traditional flash methods can require tedious dark adaptations and may yield erroneous spectral sensitivity curves which are not seen in such modifications as ramp methods. Linear response methods involve interferometry, while constant response methods involve manual or automatic adjustments of continuous illumination to keep response amplitudes constant during spectral scans. In DC or AC computerized constant response methods, feedback to determine intensities at each wavelength is derived from the response amplitudes themselves. Although all but traditional flash methods have greater or lesser abilities to provide on-line determinations of spectral sensitivities, computerized constant response methods are the most satisfactory due to flexibility, speed and maintenance of a constant adaptation level.
视觉系统的光谱敏感度被定义为在每个波长下引发相同标准响应幅度所需的光强度（量子通量）的倒数。本综述主要考虑已开发出的用于电生理测定单个视网膜细胞慢波响应标准幅度的方法。传统闪光方法可能需要冗长的暗适应过程，并且可能产生错误的光谱敏感度曲线，而在诸如斜坡方法等改进方法中则不会出现这种情况。线性响应方法涉及干涉测量，而恒定响应方法涉及手动或自动调整连续照明，以便在光谱扫描期间保持响应幅度恒定。在直流或交流计算机化恒定响应方法中，用于确定每个波长强度的反馈来自响应幅度本身。尽管除传统闪光方法外，其他方法都或多或少能够提供光谱敏感度的在线测定，但由于其灵活性、速度以及能够维持恒定适应水平，计算机化恒定响应方法是最令人满意的。
