scholarly journals Spatiotemporal receptive field structures in retinogeniculate connections of cat

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naofumi Suematsu ◽  
Tomoyuki Naito ◽  
Tomomitsu Miyoshi ◽  
Hajime Sawai ◽  
Hiromichi Sato
Keyword(s):  
Receptive Field ◽  
Spatiotemporal Receptive Field

scholarly journals Spatiotemporal Receptive Field Properties of a Looming-Sensitive Neuron in Solitarious and Gregarious Phases of the Desert Locust

2010 ◽  
Vol 103 (2) ◽  
pp. 779-792 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen M. Rogers ◽  
George W. J. Harston ◽  
Fleur Kilburn-Toppin ◽  
Thomas Matheson ◽  
Malcolm Burrows ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Receptive Field ◽  
Schistocerca Gregaria ◽  
Visual Space ◽  
Lifestyle Changes ◽  
Movement Detector ◽  
Local Motion ◽  
Gregarious Locusts ◽  
Spatiotemporal Receptive Field ◽  
Field Organization ◽  
Receptive Field Organization

Desert locusts ( Schistocerca gregaria ) can transform reversibly between the swarming gregarious phase and a solitarious phase, which avoids other locusts. This transformation entails dramatic changes in morphology, physiology, and behavior. We have used the lobula giant movement detector (LGMD) and its postsynaptic target, the descending contralateral movement detector (DCMD), which are visual interneurons that detect looming objects, to analyze how differences in the visual ecology of the two phases are served by altered neuronal function. Solitarious locusts had larger eyes and a greater degree of binocular overlap than those of gregarious locusts. The receptive field to looming stimuli had a large central region of nearly equal response spanning 120° × 60° in both phases. The DCMDs of gregarious locusts responded more strongly than solitarious locusts and had a small caudolateral focus of even further sensitivity. More peripherally, the response was reduced in both phases, particularly ventrally, with gregarious locusts showing greater proportional decrease. Gregarious locusts showed less habituation to repeated looming stimuli along the eye equator than did solitarious locusts. By contrast, in other parts of the receptive field the degree of habituation was similar in both phases. The receptive field organization to looming stimuli contrasts strongly with the receptive field organization of the same neurons to nonlooming local-motion stimuli, which show much more pronounced regional variation. The DCMDs of both gregarious and solitarious locusts are able to detect approaching objects from across a wide expanse of visual space, but phase-specific changes in the spatiotemporal receptive field are linked to lifestyle changes.

scholarly journals Strobe Rearing Reduces Direction Selectivity in Area 17 by Altering Spatiotemporal Receptive-Field Structure

1998 ◽  
Vol 80 (6) ◽  
pp. 2991-3004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen L. Humphrey ◽  
Alan B. Saul
Keyword(s):  
Receptive Field ◽  
Frequency Tuning ◽  
Temporal Frequency ◽  
Receptive Fields ◽  
Direction Selectivity ◽  
Field Structure ◽  
Area 17 ◽  
Directional Tuning ◽  
Simple Cells ◽  
Spatiotemporal Receptive Field

Humphrey, Allen L. and Alan B. Saul. Strobe rearing reduces direction selectivity in area 17 by altering spatiotemporal receptive-field structure. J. Neurophysiol. 80: 2991–3004, 1998. Direction selectivity in simple cells of cat area 17 is linked to spatiotemporal (S-T) receptive-field structure. S-T inseparable receptive fields display gradients of response timing across the receptive field that confer a preferred direction of motion. Receptive fields that are not direction selective lack gradients; they are S-T separable, displaying uniform timing across the field. Here we further examine this link using a developmental paradigm that disrupts direction selectivity. Cats were reared from birth to 8 mo of age in 8-Hz stroboscopic illumination. Direction selectivity in simple cells was then measured using gratings drifting at different temporal frequencies (0.25–16 Hz). S-T structure was assessed using stationary bars presented at different receptive-field positions, with bar luminance being modulated sinusoidally at different temporal frequencies. For each cell, plots of response phase versus bar position were fit by lines to characterize S-T inseparability at each temporal frequency. Strobe rearing produced a profound loss of direction selectivity at all temporal frequencies; only 10% of cells were selective compared with 80% in normal cats. The few remaining directional cells were selective over a narrower than normal range of temporal frequencies and exhibited weaker than normal direction selectivity. Importantly, the directional loss was accompanied by a virtual elimination of S-T inseparability. Nearly all cells were S-T separable, like nondirectional cells in normal cats. The loss was clearest in layer 4. Normally, inseparability is greatest there, and it correlates well ( r = 0.77) with direction selectivity; strobe rearing reduced inseparability and direction selectivity to very low values. The few remaining directional cells were inseparable. In layer 6 of normal cats, most direction-selective cells are only weakly inseparable, and there is no consistent relationship between the two measures. However, after strobe rearing, even the weak inseparability was eliminated along with direction selectivity. The correlated changes in S-T structure and direction selectivity were confirmed using conventional linear predictions of directional tuning based on responses to counterphasing bars and white noise stimuli. The developmental changes were permanent, being observed up to 12 yr after strobe rearing. The deficits were remarkably specific; strobe rearing did not affect spatial receptive-field structure, orientation selectivity, spatial or temporal frequency tuning, or general responsiveness to visual stimuli. These results provide further support for a critical role of S-T structure in determining direction selectivity in simple cells. Strobe rearing eliminates directional tuning by altering the timing of responses within the receptive field.

Relationship between the Dynamics of Orientation Tuning and Spatiotemporal Receptive Field Structures of Cat LGN Neurons

Neuroscience ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 377 ◽  
pp. 26-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hongjian Li ◽  
Qi Fang ◽  
Yijun Ge ◽  
Zhong Li ◽  
Jianjun Meng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Receptive Field ◽  
Orientation Tuning ◽  
Spatiotemporal Receptive Field

Spatiotemporal organization of simple-cell receptive fields in the cat's striate cortex. I. General characteristics and postnatal development

1993 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 1091-1117 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. C. DeAngelis ◽  
I. Ohzawa ◽  
R. D. Freeman
Keyword(s):  
Receptive Field ◽  
Postnatal Development ◽  
Striate Cortex ◽  
Receptive Fields ◽  
Space Time ◽  
Field Structure ◽  
Temporal Response ◽  
Spatial Frequencies ◽  
Spatiotemporal Receptive Field ◽  
Time Courses

1. Most studies of cortical neurons have focused on the spatial structure of receptive fields. For a more complete functional description of these neurons, it is necessary to consider receptive-field structure in the joint domain of space and time. We have studied the spatiotemporal receptive-field structure of 233 simple cells recorded from the striate cortex of adult cats and kittens at 4 and 8 wk postnatal. The dual goal of this study is to provide a detailed quantitative description of spatiotemporal receptive-field structure and to compare the developmental time courses of spatial and temporal response properties. 2. Spatiotemporal receptive-field profiles have been measured with the use of a reverse correlation method, in which we compute the cross-correlation between a neuron's response and a random sequence of small, briefly presented bright and dark stimuli. The receptive-field profiles of some simple cells are space-time separable, meaning that spatial and temporal response characteristics can be dissociated. Other cells have receptive-field profiles that are space-time inseparable. In these cases, a particular spatial location cannot be designated, unambiguously, as belonging to either an on or off subregion. However, separate on and off subregions may be clearly distinguished in the joint space-time domain. These subregions are generally tilted along an oblique axis. 3. Our observations show that spatial and temporal aspects of receptive-field structure mature with clearly different time courses. By 4 wk postnatal, the spatial symmetry and periodicity of simple-cell receptive fields have reached maturity. The spatial extent (or size) of these receptive fields is adult-like by 8 wk postnatal. In contrast, the response latency and time duration of spatiotemporal receptive fields do not mature until well beyond 8 wk postnatal. 4. By applying Fourier analysis to spatiotemporal receptive-field profiles, we have examined the postnatal development of spatial and temporal selectivity in the frequency domain. By 8 wk postnatal, spatial frequency tuning has clearly reached maturity. On the contrary, temporal frequency selectivity remains markedly immature at 8 wk. We have also examined the joint distribution of optimal spatial and temporal frequencies. From 4 wk postnatal until 8 wk postnatal, the range of optimal spatial frequencies increases substantially, whereas the range of optimal temporal frequencies remains largely unchanged. From 8 wk postnatal until adulthood, there is a large increase in optimal temporal frequencies for cells tuned to low spatial frequencies. For cells tuned to high spatial frequencies, the distribution of optimal temporal frequencies does not change much beyond 8 wk postnatal.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Inhibitory Contributions to Spatiotemporal Receptive-Field Structure and Direction Selectivity in Simple Cells of Cat Area 17

1999 ◽  
Vol 81 (3) ◽  
pp. 1212-1224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aditya Murthy ◽  
Allen L. Humphrey
Keyword(s):  
Receptive Field ◽  
Receptive Fields ◽  
Direction Selectivity ◽  
Field Structure ◽  
Area 17 ◽  
Directional Tuning ◽  
Simple Cells ◽  
Layer 4 ◽  
Two Measures ◽  
Spatiotemporal Receptive Field

Inhibitory contributions to spatiotemporal receptive-field structure and direction selectivity in simple cells of cat area 17. Intracortical inhibition contributes to direction selectivity in primary visual cortex, but how it acts has been unclear. We investigated this problem in simple cells of cat area 17 by taking advantage of the link between spatiotemporal (S-T) receptive-field structure and direction selectivity. Most cells in layer 4 have S-T–oriented receptive fields in which gradients of response timing across the field confer a preferred direction of motion. Linear summation of responses across the receptive field, followed by a static nonlinear amplification, has been shown previously to account for directional tuning in layer 4. We tested the hypotheses that inhibition acts by altering S-T structure or the static nonlinearity or both. Drifting and counterphasing sinewave gratings were used to measure direction selectivity and S-T structure, respectively, in 17 layer 4 simple cells before and during iontophoresis of bicuculline methiodide (BMI), a GABAA antagonist. S-T orientation was quantified from fits to response temporal phase versus stimulus spatial phase data. Bicuculline reduced direction selectivity and S-T orientation in nearly all cells, and reductions in the two measures were well correlated ( r = 0.81) and reversible. Using conventional linear predictions based on response phase and amplitude, we found that BMI-induced changes in S-T structure also accounted well for absolute changes in the amplitude and phase of responses to gratings drifting in the preferred and nonpreferred direction. For each cell we also calculated an exponent used to estimate the static nonlinearity. Bicuculline reduced the exponent in most cells, but the changes were not correlated with reductions in direction selectivity. We conclude that GABAA-mediated inhibition influences directional tuning in layer 4 primarily by sculpting S-T receptive-field structure. The source of the inhibition is likely to be other simple cells with certain spatiotemporal relationships to their target. Despite reductions in the two measures, most receptive fields maintained some directional tuning and S-T orientation during BMI. This suggests that their excitatory inputs, arising from the lateral geniculate nucleus and within area 17, are sufficient to create some S-T orientation and that inhibition accentuates it. Finally, BMI also reduced direction selectivity in 8 of 10 simple cells tested in layer 6, but the reductions were not accompanied by systematic changes in S-T structure. This reflects the fact that S-T orientation, as revealed by our first-order measures of the receptive field, is weak there normally. Inhibition likely affects layer 6 cells via more complex, nonlinear interactions.

Motion selectivity and the contrast-response function of simple cells in the visual cortex

1991 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 531-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duane G. Albrecht ◽  
Wilson S. Geisler
Keyword(s):  
Visual Cortex ◽  
Receptive Field ◽  
Response Function ◽  
Gain Control ◽  
Direction Selectivity ◽  
Metabolic Energy ◽  
Simple Cells ◽  
Contrast Response Function ◽  
Spatiotemporal Receptive Field ◽  
Contrast Response

AbstractThe responses of simple cells were recorded from the visual cortex of cats, as a function of the position and contrast of counterphase and drifting grating patterns, to assess whether direction selectivity can be accounted for on the basis of linear summation. The expected responses to a counterphase grating, given a strictly linear model, would be the sum of the responses to the two drifting components. The measured responses were not consistent with the linear prediction. For example, nearly all cells showed two positions where the responses approached zero (i.e. two “null phase positions”); this was true, even for the most direction selective cells. However, the measured responses were consistent with the hypothesis that direction selectivity is a consequence of the linear spatiotemporal receptive-field structure, coupled with the nonlinearities revealed by the contrast-response function: contrast gain control, halfwave rectification, and expansive exponent. When arranged in a particular sequence, each of these linear and nonlinear mechanisms performs a useful function in a general model of simple cells. The linear spatiotemporal receptive field initiates stimulus selectivity (for direction, orientation, spatial frequency, etc.). The expansive response exponent enhances selectivity. The contrast-set gain control maintains selectivity (over a wide range of contrasts, in spite of the limited dynamic response range and steep slope of the contrast-response function). Rectification conserves metabolic energy.

Spatiotemporal Receptive Field Organization in the Lateral Geniculate Nucleus of Cats and Kittens

1997 ◽  
Vol 78 (2) ◽  
pp. 1045-1061 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daqing Cai ◽  
Gregory C. Deangelis ◽  
Ralph D. Freeman
Keyword(s):  
Receptive Field ◽  
Lateral Geniculate Nucleus ◽  
Spatial Organization ◽  
Field Structure ◽  
Temporal Response ◽  
Temporal Phase ◽  
Lateral Geniculate ◽  
Spatiotemporal Receptive Field ◽  
Field Organization ◽  
Receptive Field Organization

Cai, Daqing, Gregory C. DeAngelis, and Ralph D. Freeman. Spatiotemporal receptive field organization in the lateral geniculate nucleus of cats and kittens. J. Neurophysiol. 78: 1045–1061, 1997. We have studied the spatiotemporal receptive-field organization of 144 neurons recorded from the dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) of adult cats and kittens at 4 and 8 wk postnatal. Receptive-field profiles were obtained with the use of a reverse correlation technique, in which we compute the cross-correlation between the action potential train of a neuron and a randomized sequence of long bright and dark bar stimuli that are flashed throughout the receptive field. Spatiotemporal receptive-field profiles of LGN neurons generally exhibit a biphasic temporal response, as well as the classical center-surround spatial organization. For nonlagged cells, the first temporal phase of the response dominates, whereas for lagged neurons, the second temporal phase of the response is typically the largest. This temporal phase difference between lagged and nonlagged cells accounts for their divergent behavior in response to flashed stimuli. Most LGN cells exhibit some degree of space-time inseparability, which means that the receptive field cannot simply be viewed as the product of a spatial waveform and a temporal waveform. In these cases, the response of the surround is typically delayed relative to that of the center, and there is some blending of center and surround during the time course of the response. We demonstrate that a simple extension of the traditional difference-of-Gaussians (DOG) model, in which the surround response is delayed relative to that of the center, accounts nicely for these findings. With regard to development, our analysis shows that spatial and temporal aspects of receptive field structure mature with markedly different time courses. After 4 wk postnatal, there is little change in the spatial organization of LGN receptive fields, with the exception of a weak, but significant, trend for the surround to become smaller and stronger with age. In contrast, there are substantial changes in temporal receptive-field structure after 4 wk postnatal. From 4 to 8 wk postnatal, the shape of the temporal response profile changes, becoming more biphasic, but the latency and duration of the response remain unchanged. From 8 wk postnatal to adulthood, the shape of the temporal profile remains approximately constant, but there is a dramatic decline in both the latency and duration of the response. Comparison of our results with recent data from cortical (area 17) simple cells reveals that the temporal development of LGN cells accounts for a substantial portion of the temporal maturation of simple cells.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document