@article {200, title = {Contrast dependence and differential contributions from somatostatin- and parvalbumin-expressing neurons to spatial integration in mouse V1.}, journal = {J Neurosci}, volume = {33}, year = {2013}, month = {2013 Jul 3}, pages = {11145-54}, abstract = {

A characteristic feature in the primary visual cortex is that visual responses are suppressed as a stimulus extends beyond the classical receptive field. Here, we examined the role of inhibitory neurons expressing somatostatin (SOM$^{+}$) or parvalbumin (PV$^{+}$) on surround suppression and preferred receptive field size. We recorded multichannel extracellular activity in V1 of transgenic mice expressing channelrhodopsin in SOM$^{+}$ neurons or PV$^{+}$ neurons. Preferred size and surround suppression were measured using drifting square-wave gratings of varying radii and at two contrasts. Consistent with findings in primates, we found that the preferred size was larger for lower contrasts across all cortical depths, whereas the suppression index (SI) showed a trend to decrease with contrast. We then examined the effect of these metrics on units that were suppressed by photoactivation of either SOM$^{+}$ or PV$^{+}$ neurons. When activating SOM$^{+}$ neurons, we found a significant increase in SI at cortical depths \>400 μm, whereas activating PV$^{+}$ neurons caused a trend toward lower SIs regardless of cortical depth. Conversely, activating PV$^{+}$ neurons significantly increased preferred size across all cortical depths, similar to lowering contrast, whereas activating SOM$^{+}$ neurons had no systematic effect on preferred size across all depths. These data suggest that SOM$^{+}$ and PV$^{+}$ neurons contribute differently to spatial integration. Our findings are compatible with the notion that SOM$^{+}$ neurons mediate surround suppression, particularly in deeper cortex, whereas PV$^{+}$ activation decreases the drive of the input to cortex and therefore resembles the effects on spatial integration of lowering contrast.

}, keywords = {Animals, Contrast Sensitivity, Female, Male, Mice, Mice, Transgenic, Neurons, Parvalbumins, Photic Stimulation, Somatostatin, Space Perception, Visual Cortex}, issn = {1529-2401}, doi = {10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5320-12.2013}, author = {Nienborg, Hendrikje and Hasenstaub, Andrea and Nauhaus, Ian and Taniguchi, Hiroki and Huang, Z Josh and Callaway, Edward M} } @article {1671, title = {Rats and humans differ in processing collinear visual features.}, journal = {Front Neural Circuits}, volume = {7}, year = {2013}, month = {2013}, pages = {197}, abstract = {

Behavioral studies in humans and rats demonstrate that visual detection of a target stimulus is sensitive to surrounding spatial patterns. In both species, the detection of an oriented visual target is affected when the surrounding region contains flanking stimuli that are collinear to the target. In many studies, collinear flankers have been shown to improve performance in humans, both absolutely (compared to performance with no flankers) and relative to non-collinear flankers. More recently, collinear flankers have been shown to impair performance in rats both absolutely and relative to non-collinear flankers. However, these observations spanned different experimental paradigms. Past studies in humans have shown that the magnitude and even sign of flanker effects can depend critically on the details of stimulus and task design. Therefore either task differences or species could explain the opposite findings. Here we provide a direct comparison of behavioral data between species and show that these differences persist--collinear flankers improve performance in humans, and impair performance in rats--in spite of controls that match stimuli, experimental paradigm, and learning procedure. There is evidence that the contrasts of the target and the flankers could affect whether surround processing is suppressive or facilitatory. In a second experiment, we explored a range of contrast conditions in the rat, to determine if contrast could explain the lack of collinear facilitation. Using different pairs of target and flanker contrast, the rat{\textquoteright}s collinear impairment was confirmed to be robust across a range of contrast conditions. We conclude that processing of collinear features is indeed different between rats and humans. We speculate that the observed difference between rat and human is caused by the combined impact of differences in the statistics in natural retinal images, the representational capacity of neurons in visual cortex, and attention.

}, keywords = {Animals, Attention, Contrast Sensitivity, Humans, Orientation, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Photic Stimulation, Rats, Visual Cortex, Visual Perception}, issn = {1662-5110}, doi = {10.3389/fncir.2013.00197}, author = {Meier, Philip M and Reinagel, Pamela} } @article {196, title = {Collinear features impair visual detection by rats.}, journal = {J Vis}, volume = {11}, year = {2011}, month = {2011}, abstract = {

We measure rats{\textquoteright} ability to detect an oriented visual target grating located between two flanking stimuli ("flankers"). Flankers varied in contrast, orientation, angular position, and sign. Rats are impaired at detecting visual targets with collinear flankers, compared to configurations where flankers differ from the target in orientation or angular position. In particular, rats are more likely to miss the target when flankers are collinear. The same impairment is found even when the flanker luminance was sign-reversed relative to the target. These findings suggest that contour alignment alters visual processing in rats, despite their lack of orientation columns in the visual cortex. This is the first report that the arrangement of visual features relative to each other affects visual behavior in rats. To provide a conceptual framework for our findings, we relate our stimuli to a contrast normalization model of early visual processing. We suggest a pattern-sensitive generalization of the model that could account for a collinear deficit. These experiments were performed using a novel method for automated high-throughput training and testing of visual behavior in rodents.

}, keywords = {Animals, Behavior, Animal, Conditioning (Psychology), Contrast Sensitivity, Lighting, Orientation, Photic Stimulation, Psychophysics, Rats, Retina, Space Perception}, issn = {1534-7362}, doi = {10.1167/11.3.22}, author = {Meier, Philip and Flister, Erik and Reinagel, Pamela} } @article {195, title = {Rat performance on visual detection task modeled with divisive normalization and adaptive decision thresholds.}, journal = {J Vis}, volume = {11}, year = {2011}, month = {2011}, abstract = {

Performance on any perceptual task depends on both the perceptual capacity and the decision strategy of the subject. We provide a model to fit both aspects and apply it to data from rats performing a detection task. When rats must detect a faint visual target, the presence of other nearby stimuli ("flankers") increases the difficulty of the task. In this study, we consider two specific factors. First, flankers could diminish the sensory response to the target via spatial contrast normalization in early visual processing. Second, rats may treat the sensory signal caused by the flankers as if it belonged to the target. We call this source confusion, which may be sensory, cognitive, or both. We account for contrast normalization and source confusion by fitting model parameters to the likelihood of the observed behavioral data. We test multiple combinations of target and flanker contrasts using a yes/no detection task. Contrast normalization was crucial to explain the rats{\textquoteright} flanker-induced detection impairment. By adding a decision variable to the contrast normalization framework, our model provides a new tool to assess differences in visual or cognitive brain function between normal and abnormal rodents.

}, keywords = {Adaptation, Physiological, Animals, Choice Behavior, Cognition, Conditioning (Psychology), Contrast Sensitivity, Male, Models, Neurological, Photic Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Rats, Rats, Long-Evans, Visual Perception}, issn = {1534-7362}, doi = {10.1167/11.9.1}, author = {Meier, Philip and Reinagel, Pamela} } @article {184, title = {Effects of gestational length, gender, postnatal age, and birth order on visual contrast sensitivity in infants.}, journal = {J Vis}, volume = {9}, year = {2009}, month = {2009}, pages = {19.1-21}, abstract = {

To investigate effects of visual experience versus preprogrammed mechanisms on visual development, we used multiple regression analysis to determine the extent to which a variety of variables (that differ in the extent to which they are tied to visual experience) predict luminance and chromatic (red/green) contrast sensitivity (CS), which are mediated by the magnocellular (M) and parvocellular (P) subcortical pathways, respectively. Our variables included gestational length (GL), birth weight (BW), gender, postnatal age (PNA), and birth order (BO). Two-month-olds (n = 60) and 6-month-olds (n = 122) were tested. Results revealed that (1) at 2 months, infants with longer GL have higher luminance CS; (2) at both ages, CS significantly increases over a approximately 21-day range of PNA, but this effect is stronger in 2- than 6-month-olds and stronger for chromatic than luminance CS; (3) at 2 months, boys have higher luminance CS than girls; and (4) at 2 months, firstborn infants have higher CS, while at 6 months, non-firstborn infants have higher CS. The results for PNA/GL are consistent with the possibility that P pathway development is more influenced by variables tied to visual experience (PNA), while M pathway development is more influenced by variables unrelated to visual experience (GL). Other variables, including prenatal environment, are also discussed.

}, keywords = {Age Factors, Analysis of Variance, Birth Order, Color Perception, Contrast Sensitivity, Female, Gender Identity, Gestational Age, Humans, Infant, Light, Male, Regression Analysis}, issn = {1534-7362}, doi = {10.1167/9.10.19}, author = {Dobkins, Karen R and Bosworth, Rain G and McCleery, Joseph P} }