Spatial processing of visual information in the movement-detecting pathway of the fly

1. Spatial processing of visual signals in the fly's movement-detecting pathway was studied by recording the responses of directionally-selective movement-detecting (DSMD) neurons in the lobula plate. The summarized results pertain to a type of neuron which preferentially responds to horizontal movement directed toward the animal's midline. Three kinds of visual stimuli were used: moving gratings, reversing-contrast gratings and reversing-contrast bars.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/47087/1/359_2004_Article_BF00613743.pd

Binocular interaction: contrast matching and contrast discrimination are predicted by the same model

How do signals from the 2 eyes combine and interact? Our recent work has challenged earlier schemes in which monocular contrast signals are subject to square-law transduction followed by summation across eyes and binocular gain control. Much more successful was a new ‘two-stage’ model in which the initial transducer was almost linear and contrast gain control occurred both pre- and post binocular summation. Here we extend that work by: (i) exploring the two-dimensional stimulus space (defined by left- and right-eye contrasts) more thoroughly, and (ii) performing contrast discrimination and contrast matching tasks for the same stimuli. Twenty-five base-stimuli made from 1 c/deg patches of horizontal grating, were defined by the factorial combination of 5 contrasts for the left eye (0.3-32%) with five contrasts for the right eye (0.3-32%). Other than in contrast, the gratings in the two eyes were identical. In a 2IFC discrimination task, the base-stimuli were masks (pedestals), where the contrast increment was presented to one eye only. In a matching task, the base-stimuli were standards to which observers matched the contrast of either a monocular or binocular test grating. In the model, discrimination depends on the local gradient of the observer’s internal contrast-response function, while matching equates the magnitude (rather than gradient) of response to the test and standard. With all model parameters fixed by previous work, the two-stage model successfully predicted both the discrimination and the matching data and was much more successful than linear or quadratic binocular summation models. These results show that performance measures and perception (contrast discrimination and contrast matching) can be understood in the same theoretical framework for binocular contrast vision

Spatial and temporal dependencies of cross-orientation suppression in human vision

A well-known property of orientation-tuned neurons in the visual cortex is that they are suppressed by the superposition of an orthogonal mask. This phenomenon has been explained in terms of physiological constraints (synaptic depression), engineering solutions for components with poor dynamic range (contrast normalization) and fundamental coding strategies for natural images (redundancy reduction). A common but often tacit assumption is that the suppressive process is equally potent at different spatial and temporal scales of analysis. To determine whether it is so, we measured psychophysical cross-orientation masking (XOM) functions for flickering horizontal Gabor stimuli over wide ranges of spatio-temporal frequency and contrast. We found that orthogonal masks raised contrast detection thresholds substantially at low spatial frequencies and high temporal frequencies (high speeds), and that small and unexpected levels of facilitation were evident elsewhere. The data were well fit by a functional model of contrast gain control, where (i) the weight of suppression increased with the ratio of temporal to spatial frequency and (ii) the weight of facilitatory modulation was the same for all conditions, but outcompeted by suppression at higher contrasts. These results (i) provide new constraints for models of primary visual cortex, (ii) associate XOM and facilitation with the transient magno- and sustained parvostreams, respectively, and (iii) reconcile earlier conflicting psychophysical reports on XOM

Selectivity of human retinotopic visual cortex to S-cone-opponent, L/M-cone-opponent and achromatic stimulation

Our aim was to make a quantitative comparison of the response of the different visual cortical areas to selective stimulation of the two different cone-opponent pathways [long- and medium-wavelength (L/M)- and short-wavelength (S)-cone-opponent] and the achromatic pathway under equivalent conditions. The appropriate stimulus-contrast metric for the comparison of colour and achromatic sensitivity is unknown, however, and so a secondary aim was to investigate whether equivalent fMRI responses of each cortical area are predicted by stimulus contrast matched in multiples of detection threshold that approximately equates for visibility, or direct (cone) contrast matches in which psychophysical sensitivity is uncorrected. We found that the fMRI response across the two colour and achromatic pathways is not well predicted by threshold-scaled stimuli (perceptual visibility) but is better predicted by cone contrast, particularly for area V1. Our results show that the early visual areas (V1, V2, V3, VP and hV4) all have robust responses to colour. No area showed an overall colour preference, however, until anterior to V4 where we found a ventral occipital region that has a significant preference for chromatic stimuli, indicating a functional distinction from earlier areas. We found that all of these areas have a surprisingly strong response to S-cone stimuli, at least as great as the L/M response, suggesting a relative enhancement of the S-cone cortical signal. We also identified two areas (V3A and hMT+) with a significant preference for achromatic over chromatic stimuli, indicating a functional grouping into a dorsal pathway with a strong magnocellular input