@article {1672,
	title = {Temporal and spatial tuning of dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus neurons in unanesthetized rats.},
	journal = {J Neurophysiol},
	volume = {115},
	year = {2016},
	month = {2016 06 01},
	pages = {2658-71},
	abstract = {<p>Visual response properties of neurons in the dorsolateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) have been well described in several species, but not in rats. Analysis of responses from the unanesthetized rat dLGN will be needed to develop quantitative models that account for visual behavior of rats. We recorded visual responses from 130 single units in the dLGN of 7 unanesthetized rats. We report the response amplitudes, temporal frequency, and spatial frequency sensitivities in this population of cells. In response to 2-Hz visual stimulation, dLGN cells fired 15.9 {\textpm} 11.4 spikes/s (mean {\textpm} SD) modulated by 10.7 {\textpm} 8.4 spikes/s about the mean. The optimal temporal frequency for full-field stimulation ranged from 5.8 to 19.6 Hz across cells. The temporal high-frequency cutoff ranged from 11.7 to 33.6 Hz. Some cells responded best to low temporal frequency stimulation (low pass), and others were strictly bandpass; most cells fell between these extremes. At 2- to 4-Hz temporal modulation, the spatial frequency of drifting grating that drove cells best ranged from 0.008 to 0.18 cycles per degree (cpd) across cells. The high-frequency cutoff ranged from 0.01 to 1.07 cpd across cells. The majority of cells were driven best by the lowest spatial frequency tested, but many were partially or strictly bandpass. We conclude that single units in the rat dLGN can respond vigorously to temporal modulation up to at least 30 Hz and spatial detail up to 1 cpd. Tuning properties were heterogeneous, but each fell along a continuum; we found no obvious clustering into discrete cell types along these dimensions.</p>
},
	keywords = {Animals, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Geniculate Bodies, Male, Neurons, Rats, Rats, Long-Evans, Wakefulness},
	issn = {1522-1598},
	doi = {10.1152/jn.00812.2014},
	author = {Sriram, Balaji and Meier, Philip M and Reinagel, Pamela}
}
@article {202,
	title = {Visual processing of contour patterns under conditions of inattentional blindness.},
	journal = {J Cogn Neurosci},
	volume = {24},
	year = {2012},
	month = {2012 Feb},
	pages = {287-303},
	abstract = {<p>An inattentional blindness paradigm was adapted to measure ERPs elicited by visual contour patterns that were or were not consciously perceived. In the first phase of the experiment, subjects performed an attentionally demanding task while task-irrelevant line segments formed square-shaped patterns or random configurations. After the square patterns had been presented 240 times, subjects{\textquoteright} awareness of these patterns was assessed. More than half of all subjects, when queried, failed to notice the square patterns and were thus considered inattentionally blind during this first phase. In the second phase of the experiment, the task and stimuli were the same, but following this phase, all of the subjects reported having seen the patterns. ERPs recorded over the occipital pole differed in amplitude from 220 to 260 msec for the pattern stimuli compared with the random arrays regardless of whether subjects were aware of the patterns. At subsequent latencies (300-340 msec) however, ERPs over bilateral occipital-parietal areas differed between patterns and random arrays only when subjects were aware of the patterns. Finally, in a third phase of the experiment, subjects viewed the same stimuli, but the task was altered so that the patterns became task relevant. Here, the same two difference components were evident but were followed by a series of additional components that were absent in the first two phases of the experiment. We hypothesize that the ERP difference at 220-260 msec reflects neural activity associated with automatic contour integration whereas the difference at 300-340 msec reflects visual awareness, both of which are dissociable from task-related postperceptual processing.</p>
},
	keywords = {Adult, Attention, Awareness, Brain, Brain Mapping, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Female, Humans, Male, Perceptual Masking, Photic Stimulation, Reaction Time, Visual Perception},
	issn = {1530-8898},
	doi = {10.1162/jocn_a_00111},
	author = {Pitts, Michael A and Mart{\'\i}nez, Ant{\'\i}gona and Hillyard, Steven A}
}
