Visual receptive field properties in the posterior suprasylvian cortex of the cat: A comparison between the areas PMLS and PLLS

Grünau, Michael W. von; Zumbroich, Thomas; Poulin, Carmen

doi:10.1016/0042-6989(87)90083-6

Cited by 55 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, previous investigations have differed with respect to the directions of movement preferred by LS neurons. Some studies suggest that a plurality prefer centrifugal movements, although others emphasize that no preference for a single best direction of movement predominates (Hubel and Wiesel, 1969;Spear and Baumann, 1975;Camarda and Rizzolatti, 1976;Blakemore and Zumbroich, 1987;Rauschecker et al, 1987;von Grunau et al, 1987). The present observations suggest that both conclusions may be justified, depending on which neurons are included in the sample.…”

Section: Directional Selectivitymentioning

confidence: 47%

Response Properties of Corticotectal and Corticostriatal Neurons in the Posterior Lateral Suprasylvian Cortex of the Cat

1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lateral suprasylvian cortex (LS) is an important source of visual projections to both the striatum and superior colliculus. Although these two LS efferent systems are likely to be involved in different aspects of visual processing, little is known about their functional properties. In the present experiments, 86 neurons in halothane-anesthetized, paralyzed cats were recorded along the posterior aspects of the medial and lateral banks of LS (PMLS and PLLS). Neurons were selected for analysis on the basis of antidromic activation from electrodes chronically implanted in the superior colliculus and caudate nucleus. The segregated nature of corticostriatal and corticotectal neurons was apparent; in no instance could a neuron be antidromically activated from both the superior colliculus and the caudate nucleus. Many common features were revealed between corticotectal and corticostriatal neurons; the majority of neurons in both populations were binocular and contralaterally dominant, showed similar responses to stationary flashed light, and expressed within-field spatial summation and surround inhibition. However, a number of information-processing features distinguished between corticotectal and corticostriatal neurons; the former were generally tuned to lower velocities than were the latter, and, for a given eccentricity in visual space, corticotectal neurons had smaller receptive fields than did corticostriatal neurons. Moreover, most corticotectal neurons displayed a marked preference for movements toward temporal visual space, whereas corticostriatal neurons revealed no specialization for a particular direction of movement. In addition, whereas corticotectal neurons were selective for receding stimuli, corticostriatal neurons were selective for approaching stimuli. The presence of these two corticofugal pathways is discussed in relation to their presumptive functional roles in the facilitation of attentive and orientation behaviors.

show abstract

Section: Directional Selectivitymentioning

confidence: 47%

Response Properties of Corticotectal and Corticostriatal Neurons in the Posterior Lateral Suprasylvian Cortex of the Cat

1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Kiefer et al (1989) found pronounced deficits in the ability of cats to discriminate two geometrical patterns that were moving on a stationary background, When the background and pattern were stationary, there was only a mild deficit that Kiefer et al (1989) attribute to undercutting of areas 17, 18 and 19 with an intermediate deficit when the background was moving relative to the pattern. These behavioral experiments, along with the doubleopponent structure of the receptive fields (von Griinau and Frost 1983) and the weak axial direction preference seen in PMLS in this work and the stronger bias reported by Blakemore and Zumbroich (1987), Rauschecker et al (1987), and yon Grfinau et al (1987), suggest that LS may be important for the analysis of optic flow fields, created by self-movement through the environment.…”

Section: Functional Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 56%

Visual response properties of neurons in the middle and lateral suprasylvian cortices of the behaving cat

Yin

Greenwood

1992

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The visual response properties of cells in the middle (MS) and lateral (LS) suprasylvian cortices were studied in alert cats, which were trained to fixate a spot of light and maintain fixation when a second test light was introduced in the midst of fixation. This second light served to test for visual sensitivity, and it could be moved at different speeds in any direction under computer control. Over half of the cells exhibited a visual response. With a small spot of light, most cells were directionally selective and responded better to a moving spot than to a stationary one. In some cases movements of the spot in the non-preferred direction revealed an inhibitory process. The visual receptive fields were large and often extended into the ipsilateral hemifield, though the centers of the receptive fields were usually in the contralateral field. We used Fourier analysis to quantify directional selectivity and compared these results to other commonly used measures of directional selectivity. Compared to cells in MS, there was a higher incidence of visual cells in LS and the visual cells were more directional. We also made comparisons between our results and those found in anesthetized cats and awake monkeys.

show abstract

“…For example, area 21a is mainly concerned with form vision, whereas the three areas of LS cortex are involved in aspects of motion perception (Dreher et al, 1996;Payne, 1993): area PMLS appears to respond more or less equally to all types of motion stimuli Spear and Baumann, 1975), whereas AMLS shows greater selectivity for 3D and component motion (Ouellette et al, 2004;Toyama et al, 1990), with PLLS more responsive to radial and differential figure-ground motion (Li et al, 2000;von Grunau et al, 1987) as well as showing activation during saccadic eye movements in the absence of a visual target (Komatsu et al, 1983). A major challenge will be to determine the relative contributions of specific laminar inputs and intrinsic area structure to such functional differences.…”

Section: Functional Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Cytoarchitectural differences are a key determinant of laminar projection origins in the visual cortex

Hilgetag

Grant

2010

NeuroImage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual receptive field properties in the posterior suprasylvian cortex of the cat: A comparison between the areas PMLS and PLLS

Cited by 55 publications

References 36 publications

Response Properties of Corticotectal and Corticostriatal Neurons in the Posterior Lateral Suprasylvian Cortex of the Cat

Response Properties of Corticotectal and Corticostriatal Neurons in the Posterior Lateral Suprasylvian Cortex of the Cat

Visual response properties of neurons in the middle and lateral suprasylvian cortices of the behaving cat

Cytoarchitectural differences are a key determinant of laminar projection origins in the visual cortex

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About