J Physiol Society Meetings
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Physiology in Press

First published online on February 20, 2004.
Copyright © 2004 by The Physiological Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
556/3/971    most recent
jphysiol.2003.058941v1
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Dirk Jancke
Gregor Schoener
Hubert R Dinse
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jancke, D.
Right arrow Articles by Dinse, H. R
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jancke, D.
Right arrow Articles by Dinse, H. R

Received November 28, 2003
Revised December 18, 2003
Accepted after revision February 19, 2004

Shorter latencies for motion trajectories than for flashes in population responses of primary visual cortex

Dirk Jancke1*, Wolfram Erlhagen2, Gregor Schoener1, and Hubert R Dinse1

1 Ruhr-University-Bochum
2 Universidade do Minho

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: jancke{at}neurobiologie.rub.de.

Psychophysical evidence in humans indicates that localization is different for stationary flashed and coherently moving objects. To address how the primary visual cortex represents object position we used a population approach that pools spiking activity of many neurons in cat area 17. In response to flashed stationary squares (0.4 deg) we obtained localized activity distributions in visual field coordinates, which we referred to as profiles across a "population receptive field" (PRF). We here show how motion trajectories can be derived from activity across the PRF and how the representation of moving and flashed stimuli differs in position. We found that motion was represented by peaks of population activity that followed the stimulus with a speed-dependent lag. However, time-to-peak latencies were shorter by ~16 ms as compared to the population responses to stationary flashes. In addition, motion representation showed a directional bias as latencies were more reduced for peripheral-central motion compared to opposite direction. We suggest that a moving stimulus provides "pre-activation" that allow a more rapid processing than for a single flash event.


Key words: Motion • Receptive field • Visual cortex







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2004 The Physiological Society.