Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-04T11:52:29.043Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Responses of neurons in cat striate cortex to vernier offsets in reverse contrast stimuli

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 June 2009

N.v. Swindale
N.v. Swindale
Affiliation:
Department of Ophthalmology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V5Z 3N9.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines how the responses of cells in area 17 of the cat vary as a function of the vernier offset between a bright and a dark bar. The study was prompted by the finding that human vernier acuity is reduced for bars or edges of opposite contrast sign (Mather & Morgan, 1986; O'Shea & Mitchell, 1990). Both simple and complex cells showed V-shaped tuning curves for reverse contrast stimuli: i.e. response was minimum at alignment, and increased with increasing vernier offset. For vernier bars with the same contrast sign, γ-shaped tuning curves were found, as reported earlier (Swindale & Cynader, 1986). Sensitivity to offset was inversely correlated in the two paradigms. However, complex cells with high sensitivity to offsets in a normal vernier stimulus were significantly less sensitive to offsets in reverse contrast stimuli. A cell's response to a vernier stimulus in which both bars are bright can be predicted by the shape of its orientation tuning curve, if the vernier stimulus is approximated by a single bar with an orientation equal to that of a line joining the midpoints of the two component bars (Swindale & Cynader, 1986). This approximation did not hold for the reverse contrast condition: orientation tuning curves for compound barswere broad and shallow, rather than bimodal, with peaks up to 40 deg from the preferred orientation. Results from simple cells were compared with predictions made by a linear model of the receptive field. The model predicted the V-shaped tuning curves found for reverse contrast stimuli. It also predicted that absolute values of tuning slopes for vernier offsets in reverse contrast stimuli might sometimes be higher than with normal stimuli. This was observed in some simple cells. The model was unable to explain the shape of orientation tuning curves for compound bars, nor could it explain the breakdown of the equivalent orientation approximation.

Keywords

Area 17CatHyperacuityReceptive fieldsVernier acuityVisual cortex
Type
Research Articles
Information
Visual Neuroscience , Volume 12 , Issue 5 , September 1995 , pp. 805 - 817
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adelsen, E.H. & Bergen, J.R. (1985). Spatiotemporal energy models for the perception of motion. Journal of the Optical Society of America A 2, 284–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, C.L. Jr & Cynader, M.S. (1986). Spatial receptive field properties of direction selective neurons in cat striate cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 6, 1136–1152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavanagh, P., Brussell, E.M. & Stober, S.R. (1981). Evidence against independent processing of black and white features. Perception and Psychophysics 29, 423–428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fendick, M. & Swindale, N.V. (1994). Vernier acuity for edges defined by flicker. Vision Research 34, 2717–2726.Google Scholar
Hall, S. (1992). The effect of stimulus contrast and temporal offset motion on vernier acuity in the cat and human. Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis, Dalhousie University.Google Scholar
Hammond, P. & MacKay, D.M. (1977). Differential responsiveness of simple and complex cells in cat striate cortex to visual texture. Experimental Brain Research 30, 275–296.Google ScholarPubMed
Jones, J.P. & Palmer, L.A. (1987). The two-dimensional spatial structure of simple receptive fields in cat striate cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology 58, 1187–1211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kulikowski, J.J., Marcelja, S. & Bishop, P.O. (1982). Theory of spatial position and spatial-frequency relations in receptive fields of simple cells in the visual cortex. Biological Cybernetics 43, 187–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levi, D.M. & Westheimer, G. (1987). Spatial-interval discrimination in the human fovea: What delimits the interval? Journal of the Optical Society of America A 4, 1304–1313.Google Scholar
Mather, G. & Morgan, M. (1986). Irradiation: Implications for theories of edge localization. Vision Research 26, 1007–1015.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Movshon, J.A., Thompson, I.D. & Tolhurst, D.J. (1978). Receptive-field organization of complex cells in the cat's striate cortex. Journal of Physiology (London) 283, 79–99.Google Scholar
Murphy, K.M., Jones, D.G. & Van Sluyters, R.C. (1988). Vernier acuity for an opposite contrast stimulus. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science (Suppl.) 29, 138.Google Scholar
Murphy, K.M. & Mitchell, D.E. (1991). Vernier acuity of normal and visually deprived cats. Vision Research 31, 253–266.Google Scholar
O'Shea, R.P. & Mitchell, D.E. (1990). Vernier acuity with opposite-contrast stimuli. Perception 19, 207–221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skottun, B.C., Grosof, D.H. & DeValois, R.L. (1988). Responses of simple and complex cells to random dot patterns: A quantitative comparison. Journal of Neurophysiology 59, 1719–1735.Google Scholar
Spitzer, H. & Hochstein, S. (1985). A complex-cell receptive-field model. Journal of Neurophysiology 53, 1266–1286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swindale, N.V. & Cynader, M.S. (1986). Vernier acuity of neurons in cat visual cortex. Nature 319, 591–593.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swindale, N.V. & Cynader, M.S. (1989). Vernier acuities of neurons in area 17 of cat visual cortex: Their relation to stimulus length and velocity, orientation selectivity, and receptive-field structure. Visual Neuroscience 2, 165–176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swindale, N.V. (1993 a). Neuronal vernier acuity for opposite contrast stimuli. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science (Suppl.) 34, 794.Google Scholar
Swindale, N.V. (1993b). Contrast integration along the length axis of area 17 neurons: Linear or non-linear? Society for Neuroscience Abstracts 19, 628.Google Scholar
Swindale, N.V. & Mitchell, D.E. (1994). Comparison of receptive-field properties of neurons in area 17 of normal and bilaterally amblyopic cats. Experimental Brain Research 99, 399–410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waugh, S.J., Levi, D.M. & Carney, T. (1993). Orientation, masking, and vernier acuity for line targets. Vision Research 33, 1619–1638.Google Scholar
Westheimer, G. (1981). Visual hyperacuity. In Progress in Sensory Physiology, Vol. I, ed. Autrim, H., pp. 1–30. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Wilson, H.R. (1986). Responses of spatial mechanisms can explain hyperacuity. Vision Research 26, 453–469.Google Scholar