Group in Vision Science and School of Optometry, Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-2020, USA
Address correspondence to Ralph D. Freeman, 360 Minor Hall, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-2020, USA. Email: freeman{at}neurovision.berkeley.edu.
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Columnar structure has been identified for several visual parameters, including orientation and ocular dominance (Hubel et al., 1977) and direction selectivity (Payne et al., 1980
); but see (Bonhoeffer et al., 1995
; Shmuel and Grinvald, 1996
). The standard methods that have been used to study columnar organization include single-cell recording, metabolic labeling and optical imaging. These approaches generally allow for a mapping of one or two response variables across visual cortex, with relatively poor resolution. A recent study has included orientation, ocular dominance and spatial frequency, but resolution is still low (Hubener et al., 1997
). In addition to the problems with resolution, not all important visual variables have been studied by the standard imaging techniques. For example, receptive field shape (phase), response latency and temporal frequency selectivity are not amenable to analysis by imaging.
A different approach enables analysis of a variety of parameters with high resolution. The method involves recording simultaneously from pairs of adjacent neurons in the visual cortex and using a powerful visual stimulation and analysis technique that allows a number of parameters to be analyzed together. Comparisons can then be made between the two cells to find which parameters are similar and which are different. The assumption here is that both cells reside within a cortical column. Since columns are not being measured, per se, the inferences that are made are assumed to be applicable to columnar organization. The results of this approach, which have been published previously (DeAngelis et al., 1999) are reviewed here.
![]() |
Methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Two main types of analysis are used. In the first, a model-free process is used by which the degree of similarity between the receptive fields of a pair of neurons is assessed. This analysis provides a useful index of the degree of similarity between two receptive fields. However, it does not permit an analysis of how receptive fields of pairs of cells are different. To determine this, a second technique is used. This parametric model-based analysis provides data on specific relevant response parameters including spatial and temporal factors. A model is required for the second type of analysis. In this case, the model consists of two space-time separable receptive fields. Each is modeled as the product of a spatial and a temporal waveform. These two subunits are identical except for a 90º difference in spatial and temporal phases. The two receptive fields are combined to form a space-time inseparable unit. A weighting factor, applied in the combination, determines the degree of inseparability of the combined unit. Degree of inseparability is also an index of directional selectivity (DeAngelis et al., 1993, 1999
). With this second method of analysis, it is possible to derive a series of spatial and temporal comparisons between every cell pair.
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
Temporal data also exhibit clustering although the degree is relatively modest. For peak response latency (Fig. 1E), response duration (Fig. 1F
) and temporal frequency (Fig. 1G
), all three variables are significantly clustered. The final graph, for direction selectively, indicates a lack of clustering for the index
. However, neighboring cells tend to prefer the same direction of motion. This association in direction preference of neighboring neurons has been noted in single-cell studies (Tolhurst et al., 1981
).
It is possible to quantify the degree of clustering for each parameter by using a statistical permutation test. To do this, a distribution of absolute pairwise differences is derived for each receptive field parameter studied. The median value of the distribution is then used to obtain a statistical value that may be called a grand random median. A clustering index may then be obtained; this is defined as the ratio of the grand random median to the paired median. If this ratio is large, then the clustering is strong. Details of this derivation are given elsewhere (DeAngelis et al., 1999).
Results of this quantitative analysis show that orientation is clustered to a far greater extent than any other parameter. Highly significant clustering is also exhibited for receptive field width and preferred spatial frequency. Weaker, but still significant, clustering is found for the temporal response measurements. This includes latency, duration and preferred temporal frequency. Clustering is not significant for the direction selectivity index, but, as noted above, paired cells tend to prefer the same direction of movement. The factor that stands out as not exhibiting significant clustering is receptive field shape, i.e. spatial phase. This may provide a significant coding and processing advantage, as noted below.
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
The results of these analyses provide several interesting conclusions. The most basic question concerns the overall similarity of the spatiotemporal receptive fields of adjacent neurons. Analysis shows that adjacent simple cells are generally quite dissimilar if comparisons are made in the entire space-time domain. This does not fit the common notion of similarity between neighboring cells. Instead, it suggests that there is considerably less redundancy than what one would expect in the case of homogeneous columns.
Another interesting conclusion concerns the degree of clustering for different response parameters. Clustering is strong for orientation and spatial frequency and weaker for the temporal parameters of frequency, response latency and duration. The most important variable that accounts for differences between adjacent neurons is spatial phase or receptive field shape. Little variability between neighboring cells is accounted for by other receptive field parameters.
Finally, it is of interest to consider possible functional implications of the variability in spatial phase. The diversity in this parameter could be beneficial in the processing of information in central visual pathways. Specifically, the diversity of phase could be used in the hierarchical processing of information from simple to complex cells in the visual cortex.
![]() |
Footnotes |
---|
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Blasdel GG (1992b) Orientation selectivity, preference, and continuity in monkey striate cortex. J Neurosci 12:31393161.[Abstract]
Bonhoeffer T, Kim DS, Malonek D, Shoham D, Grinvald A (1995) Optical imaging of the layout of functional domains in area 17 and across the area 17/18 border in cat visual cortex. Eur J Neurosci 7:19731988.[ISI][Medline]
DeAngelis GC, Ohzawa I, Freeman RD (1993) Spatiotemporal organization of simple-cell receptive fields in the cats striate cortex. I. General characteristics and postnatal development. J Neurophysiol 69:10911117.
DeAngelis GC, Ghose GM, Ohzawa I, Freeman RD (1999) Functional micro-organization of primary visual cortex: receptive field analysis of nearby neurons. J Neurosci 19:40464064.
Hubel DH, Wiesel TN (1974) Sequence regularity and geometry of orientation columns in the monkey striate cortex. J Comp Neurol 158:267293.[ISI][Medline]
Hubel DH, Wiesel TN, LeVay S (1977) Plasticity of ocular dominance columns in monkey striate cortex. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 278:377409.[ISI][Medline]
Hubener M, Shoham D, Grinvald A, Bonhoeffer T (1997) Spatial relationships among three columnar systems in cat area 17. J Neurosci 17:92709284.
Mountcastle VB (1997) The columnar organization of the neocortex. Brain 120:701722.[Abstract]
Payne BR, Elberger AJ, Berman N, Murphy EH (1980) Binocularity in the cat visual cortex is reduced by sectioning the corpus callosum. Science 207:10971099.[ISI][Medline]
Shmuel A, Grinvald A (1996) Functional organization for direction of motion and its relationship to orientation maps in cat area 18. J Neurosci 16:69456964.
Tolhurst DJ, Dean AF, Thompson ID (1981) Preferred direction of movement as an element in the organization of cat visual cortex. Exp Brain Res 44:340342.[ISI][Medline]
|