Dorsal stream receptive field development entails growing visual field coverage

Duffield, Stuart; Gomez, Jesse

doi:10.1167/jov.21.9.2413

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, pRF remapping has been reported in dorsal maps, where pRF coverage becomes increasingly dense in the periphery between childhood and adulthood. For example, pRF sizes in IPS1 are larger and more eccentric in adults than children 70 . Further, and as noted above, there is evidence of cone migration through adolescence 63,64 and such changes in cone position could impact the receptive field properties of downstream visual neurons.…”

Section: Biological Underpinnings: Changes In Receptive Field Coverag...mentioning

confidence: 98%

Comparing retinotopic maps of children and adults reveals a late-stage change in how V1 samples the visual field

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adult visual performance differs with angular location –it is better for stimuli along the horizontal than vertical, and lower than upper vertical meridian of the visual field. These perceptual asymmetries are paralleled by asymmetries in cortical surface area in primary visual cortex (V1). Children, unlike adults, have similar visual performance at the lower and upper vertical meridian. Do children have similar V1 surface area representing the upper and lower vertical meridian? Using MRI, we measure the surface area of retinotopic maps (V1-V3) in children and adults. Many features of the maps are similar between groups, including greater V1 surface area for the horizontal than vertical meridian. However, unlike adults, children have a similar amount of V1 surface area representing the lower and upper vertical meridian. These data reveal a late-stage change in V1 organization that may relate to the emergence of the visual performance asymmetry along the vertical meridian by adulthood.

show abstract

Section: Biological Underpinnings: Changes In Receptive Field Coverag...mentioning

confidence: 98%

Comparing retinotopic maps of children and adults reveals a late-stage change in how V1 samples the visual field

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, pRF remapping has been reported in dorsal maps, where pRF coverage becomes increasingly dense in the periphery between childhood and adulthood. For example, pRF sizes in IPS1 are larger and more eccentric in adults than children (Duffield and Gomez, 2021). Further, and as noted above, there is evidence of cone migration through adolescence (Hendrickson et al, 2012; Vajzovic et al, 2012) and such changes in cone position could impact the receptive field properties of downstream visual neurons.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing retinotopic maps of children and adults reveals a late-stage change in how V1 samples the visual field

Himmelberg

Tuncok

Gomez

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adult visual ability differs markedly with stimulus polar angle: relative to the point of fixation, visual performance is best for stimuli to the left or right, intermediate for stimuli below, and poorest for stimuli above. These polar angle asymmetries in performance are paralleled by cortical asymmetries in the visual field representation in primary visual cortex (V1). Whereas children, like adults, show better performance for stimuli along the horizontal than the vertical meridian, they show no performance difference for stimuli above vs below fixation. Is the difference in visual performance between children and adults matched by a difference in the amount of V1 surface area representing these regions? We used fMRI to measure the distribution of the cortical surface representing the visual field in children and adults. Two properties of the V1, V2, and V3 maps were mature in children -overall map surface area and variation in surface area as a function of eccentricity. Further, like adults, children had much greater V1 surface area representing the horizontal than vertical meridian. However, unlike adults, children did not have greater V1 surface area for the lower than upper vertical meridian. These data indicate a late-stage change in the architecture of V1 that may drive the emergence of a visual performance asymmetry along the vertical meridian by adulthood.

show abstract

“…Similarly, pRF remapping has been reported in dorsal maps, where pRF coverage becomes increasingly dense in the periphery between childhood and adulthood. For example, pRF sizes in IPS1 are larger and more eccentric in adults than children 70 . Further, and as noted above, there is evidence of cone migration through adolescence 43,44 and such changes in cone position could impact the receptive field properties of downstream visual neurons.…”

Section: Biological Underpinningsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Comparing visual cortex of children and adults reveals a late-stage change in the architecture of V1

Himmelberg

Tuncok²,

Gomez

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adult visual ability differs markedly with stimulus polar angle location: relative to fixation, visual performance is best for stimuli along the horizontal, intermediate for stimuli along the lower vertical, and poorest for stimuli along the upper vertical meridian of the visual field. These polar angle asymmetries in visual performance are paralleled by cortical asymmetries in the visual field representation in primary visual cortex (V1). Whereas children, like adults, have better performance for stimuli along the horizontal than vertical meridian, children show no difference in performance for stimuli along the lower vs upper vertical meridian. Is the difference in visual performance between children and adults matched by a difference in the amount of V1 surface area representing these regions? We used fMRI to measure the distribution of cortical surface representing the visual field in children (n=24) and adults (n=24). Two properties of the V1, V2, and V3 maps were mature in children –overall map surface area and surface area variation as a function of eccentricity. Further, like adults, children had greater V1 surface area representing the horizontal than vertical meridian. However, unlike adults, children did not have greater V1 surface area representing the lower than upper vertical meridian. These data indicate a late-stage change in the architecture of V1 that may drive the emergence of a visual performance asymmetry along the vertical meridian by adulthood.

show abstract

Dorsal stream receptive field development entails growing visual field coverage

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Comparing retinotopic maps of children and adults reveals a late-stage change in how V1 samples the visual field

Comparing retinotopic maps of children and adults reveals a late-stage change in how V1 samples the visual field

Comparing retinotopic maps of children and adults reveals a late-stage change in how V1 samples the visual field

Comparing visual cortex of children and adults reveals a late-stage change in the architecture of V1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About