Dear Friends,
Here are the replies I received regarding my query about differences
in dynamics of P/M (X/Y) pathways. Many thanks to all contributors,
and sorry for the delay. I expect to maintain a database on the subject
(references and people) at neuro-psycho-cognitive levels, then additional
and recent informations are always welcome.
Regards,
William
-- Dr. William H.A. BEAUDOT E-mail: william.beaudot@csemne.ch CSEM SA Finger: beaudot@design.csemne.ch Advanced Research & Development Dept.: Bio-inspired Research Jaquet-Droz 1 Phone: (41) 38 205 251/666 CH-2007 Neuchatel (Switzerland) Fax: (41) 38 205 763
----- Begin Included Message -----
From: paulm@physiol.su.oz.au
Dear William, there is some phase delay data in:
Lee, B.B., J. Pokorny, V.C. Smith, P.R. Martin, and A. Valberg (1990) Luminance and chromatic modulation sensitivity of macaque ganglion cells and human observers. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 7 : 2223-2236.
Smith, V.C., B.B. Lee, J. Pokorny, P.R. Martin, and A. Valberg (1992) Responses of macaque ganglion cells to the relative phase of heterochromatically modulated lights. J. Physiol. 458 : 191-221.
and citations therein.
regards, paul
Dr Paul R. Martin * Dept Physiology F13 * University of Sydney NSW 2006 Australia * Tel: +61 2 351-3928 * Fax +61 2 351-2058 Email: paulm@physiol.su.oz.au
=========================================================================
From: "James T. McIlwain" <BI599003@BROWNVM.brown.edu>
Dr. Beaudot, You might consult a recent paper in Visual Neuroscience for information and references:
"Visual latencies in areas V1 and V2 of the macaque monkey" by L.G. Nowak, M.H.J. Munk, P. Girard and J. Bullier. Visual Neuroscience 12:371-384, 1995.
If you don't have access to the journal, write to J. Bullier, Cerveau et Vision, INSERM Unite 371, 18 avenue du Doyen Lepine, 69500 Bron/Lyon, France. He will perhaps be able to suppy a reprint. The e-mail address I have is bullier@cismibm.univ-lyon1.fr but I can't vouch for this.
J.Mc.
=========================================================================
From: matteo@cns.NYU.EDU (Matteo Carandini)
you may want to look at
@article{Shapley86, author = "R M Shapley and V H Perry", title = "Cat and monkey retinal ganglion cells and their visual functional roles", journal = "TINS", year = "1986", pages = "1-7"}
@article{Shapley90, author = "R Shapley", title = "Visual sensitivity and parallel retinocortical channels", journal = "Annu Rev Psychol", year = 1990, volume = 41, pages = "635--658"}
Best regards,
-Matteo * Matteo Carandini Center for Neural Science New York University 4 Washington Place, #809 New York NY 10003 vox: (212) 998 7898 fax: (212) 995 4011 *
=========================================================================
From: menozzi@iha.bepr.ethz.ch (Marino Menozzi)
Cher Dr. William H.A. BEAUDOT=
Vous pouvez trouver les references en question chez:
Orban G. A. (ed), Neuronal operations in the visual cortex, Berlin, Heidelberg etc., 1984, Springer - Verlag
Marino Menozzi Intitute for Hygiene and Applied Physiology Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) CH - 8092 Zurich
e-mail: menozzi@iha.bepr.ethz.ch
=========================================================================
From: fuhr@vision.vsrc.uab.edu (Dr. Patti Fuhr)
Hi William,
Here is an excerpt from my dissertation which investigated the effects of peripheral field stimulation on targets in the visual field. In the intro I describe some of the differences in M and P pathways. I have included all the references I used. Hope it helps. Good Luck.
Patti Fuhr, O.D., Ph.D. furh@vision.vsrc.uab.edu
The M (large cell) subdivision consists of the two ventral layers of the LGN that receive their afferents mainly from the large (type A) cells of the retina, and project to layer 4ca of visual cortex. Physiologically, M-cells are wavelength nonopponent, have larger receptive fields than P-cells, respond quickly and transiently to visual stimulation, prefer low spatial and high temporal frequencies, are very sensitive to low contrast stimuli and show response saturation at low levels of contrast, and are strongly affected by peripheral field stimulation (PFS). M-cells are thought to be involved in the processing of fast flicker, motion, depth, and luminance (Derrington, Krauskopf & Lennie, 1984; DeValois, Abramov & Jacobs 1966; Kaplan & Shapley, 1985; Kruger, 1977; Livingstone & Hubel 1988; Schiller & Malpeli, 1978; Shapley & Perry, 1986).
Evidence of multiple information processing channels has also been found psychophysically. Sustained and transient channels have been identified (Breitmeyer, Levi, & and Harwerth, 1981; Livingstone & Hubel, 1988; Kulikowski & Tolhurst, 1973;), as have chromatic (color-opponent) and achromatic (nonopponent, luminance) channels (King-Smith & Carden 1976, Livingstone & Hubel 1988; Sperling & Harwerth, 1971). Harwerth, Boltz, & Smith (1980), demonstrated the transient and sustained dichotomy psychophysically in monkeys, thus establishing an important link between well-known physiological properties and psychophysical properties in the same species.
Based on similarities of spatial and temporal properties, as well as responses to color and luminance, it has been suggested that the sustained and chromatic channels, and the P-pathway, are synonymous. A similar linkage has been suggested for transient and achromatic channels and the M-pathway (Breitmeyer, 1984; Derrington, Krauskopf & Lennie, 1984; Livingstone & Hubel, 1987a, 1988). In this paper I assume these linkages are correct. One characteristic of monkey M-cells that was mentioned above is that they respond strongly to peripheral field stimulation and low contrast stimuli, while P-cells do not (Derrington & Lennie, 1984; Kaplan & Shapley, 1985; Kruger, 1977; Shapley & Perry, 1986). Psychophysical correlates of the physiological response to PFS have been demonstrated in humans, and it has been suggested they are mediated by the M-pathway (Badcock & Smith, 1988; Derrington, 1984; He & Loop, 1990; Mattingly & Badcock, 1991). The following experiments further investigate this suggestion.
REFERENCES
Badcock, D. R., & Sevdalis, E. (1987). Masking by uniform field flicker: Some practical problems. Perception, 16, 641-647.
Badcock, D. R., & Smith D. (1989). Uniform field flicker: Masking and facilitation. Vision Research, 29, 803-809.
Barlow, H. B., Derrington, A. M., Harris, L. R., & Lennie, P. (1977). The effects of remote retinal stimulation on the responses of cat retinal ganglion cells. Journal of Physiology (London), 269, 177-194.
Blakemore, C., & Vital-Durand, F. (1986). Organization and development of the monkey's lateral geniculate nucleus. Journal of Physiology, 380, 453-491.
Bowling, A. (1985). The effects of peripheral movement and flicker on the detection thresholds of sinusoidal gratings. Perception and Psychophysics, 37, 181-188.
Breitmeyer, B. (1984). Visual Masking: An integrative approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Breitmeyer, B., Levi, D. M., & Harwerth, R. S. (1981). Flicker masking in spatial vision. Vision Research, 21, 1377-1385.
Breitmeyer, B. G., & Valberg, A. (1979). Local foveal inhibitory effects of global peripheral excitation. Science, 203, 463-464.
Breitmeyer, B. G., Valberg, A., Kurtenbach, W., & Neumeyer, C. (1980). The lateral effect of oscillation of peripheral luminance gratings on the foveal increment threshold. Vision Research, 20, 799-805.
Brooks, B. A., & Impelman, D. M. (1981). Suppressive effects of a peripheral grating displacement during saccadic eye movement and during fixation. Experimental Brain Research, 42, 489-492.
Cleland, B. G., Dubin, M. W., & Levick, W. R. (1971). Sustained and transient neurones in the cat's retina and lateral geniculate nucleus. Journal of Physiology (London), 217, 473-496.
Cleland, B. G., & Levick, W. R. (1972). Physiology of cat retinal ganglion cells. Investigative Ophthalmology and Vision Science, 11, 285-291.
Cleland, B. G., Levick, W. R., & Sanderson, K. J. (1973). Properties of sustained and transient ganglion cells in the cat retina. Journal of Physiology (London), 228, 649-680.
Crook, J. M., Lange-Malecki, B., Lee, B., & Valberg, A. (1988). Visual resolution of macaque retinal ganglion cells. Journal of Physiology, 396, 205-224.
Dacey, D. M. (1993). The mosaic of midget ganglion cells in the human retina. Journal of Neuroscience, 13(12), 5334-5355.
de Monasterio, F. M. (1978). Properties of concentrically organized X and Y ganglion cells of macaque retina. Journal of Neurophysiology, 41(6),1394-1417.
Derrington, A. M. (1984). Spatial frequency selectivity of remote pattern masking. Vision Research, 24, 1965-1968.
Derrington, A. M., Krauskopf, J., & Lennie, P. (1984). Chromatic mechanisms in lateral geniculate nucleus of macaque. Journal of Physiology (London), 357, 241-265.
Derrington, A. M., & Lennie, P. (1984). Spatial and temporal contrast sensitivities of neurones in lateral geniculate nucleus of macaque. Journal of Physiology (London), 357, 219-240.
Derrington, A. M., Lennie, P., & Wright, M. J. (1979). The mechanism of peripherally evoked responses in retinal ganglion cells. Journal of Physiology (London), 289, 299-310.
DeValois, R. L., Abramov, I., & Jacobs, G. H. (1966). Analysis of response patterns of LGN cells. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 56, 966-977.
Enroth-Cugell, C., & Robson, J. G. (1966). The contrast sensitivity of retinal ganglion cells of cat. Journal of Physiology, 187, 517-552.
Essock, E. A., & Lehmkuhle, S. (1982). The oblique effects of pattern and flicker sensitivity: Implications for mixed physiological input. Perception, 11, 441-455.
Finkelstein, M. A., & Hood, D. C. (1982). Opponent-color cells can influence detection of small, brief lights. Vision Research, 24, 1965-1968.
Fischer, B., Barth, R., & Sternheim, C. E. (1978). Interaction of receptive field responses and shift-effect in cat retinal and geniculate neurons. Experimental Brain Research, 31, 235-248.
Fischer, B., & Kruger, J. (1974). The shift-effect in the cat's lateral geniculate neurons. Experimental Brain Research, 21, 225-227.
Fischer, B., & Kruger, J. (1980). Continuous movement of remote patterns and shift-effect of cat retinal ganglion cells. Experimental Brain Research, 40, 229-232.
Fischer, B., Kruger, J., & Droll, W. (1975). Quantitative aspects of the shift-effect in cat retinal ganglion cells. Brain Research, 83, 391-403.
Fuhr, P. S., & Kuyk, T. (1992a). Effects of peripheral flicker on detection thresholds of spectral flashes. Investigative Ophthalmology and Vision Science, 33(Suppl 4), 705.
Fuhr, P. S., & Kuyk, T. (1992b). A selective test of magnocellular function in normals, glaucoma suspects, and glaucoma patients. Optometry and Vision Science, 69(Suppl 12), 51.
Green, M. (1981). Psychophysical relationships among mechanisms sensitive to pattern, motion and flicker. Vision Research, 21, 971-983.
Green, M. (1983). Visual masking by flickering surrounds. Vision Research, 23, 735-744.
Hamasaki, D. I., & Hanada, I. (1983). A comparison of the shift response of X- and Y-cells in the cat's retina. Experimental Brain Research, 50, 117-124.
Harwerth, R.S., Boltz, R.L., & Smith E. L. (1980). Psychophysical evidence for sustained and transient channels in the monkey visual system. Vision Research, 20, 15-22.
He, Z., & Loop, M. S. (1990). Peripheral field stimulation affects foveal flicker, but not color, sensitivity. Vision Research, 30(7), 1107-1110.
Hochstein, S., & Shapley, R. M.(1976). Linear and nonlinear spatial subunits in Y cat retinal ganglion cells. Journal of Physiology (London), 262, 265-284.
Ingling, C. R., & Martinez-Ureigas, E. (1983). The relationship between spectral sensitivity and spatial sensitivity for the primate r-g X-channel. Vision Research, 23, 1495-1500.
Kaiser, P. K., & Ayama, M. (1986). Small, brief foveal stimuli: An additivity experiment. Journal of the Optical Society of America, A, 3, 930-934.
Kaplan, E., & Shapley, R. M. (1986). The primate retina contains two types of ganglion cells, with high and low contrast sensitivity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA, 83, 2755-2757.
Kelly, D.H., & van Norren, D. (1977). Two-band model of heterochromatic flicker. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 67(8), 1081-1091.
King-Smith, P. E., & Carden, D. (1976). Luminance and opponent-color contributions to visual detection and adaptation to temporal and spatial integration. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 66, 709-717.
Kruger, J. (1977). The shift-effect in the lateral geniculate body of the rhesus monkey. Experimental Brain Research, 29, 387-392.
Kruger, J. (1980). The shift-effect enhances X- and suppresses Y-type response characteristics of cat retinal ganglion cells. Brain Research, 201, 71-84.
Kruger, J., & Fischer, B. (1973a). Strong periphery effect in cat retinal ganglion cells. Excitatory responses in ON- and OFF-center neurones to single grid displacements. Experimental Brain Research, 18, 316-318.
Kruger, J., Fischer, B., & Barth, R. (1975). The shift-effect in retinal ganglion cells of the rhesus monkey. Experimental Brain Research, 23, 443-446.
Kuffler, S. W. (1953). Discharge patterns and functional organization of mammalian retina. Journal of Neurophysiology, 16, 36-68.
Kulikowski, J. J., & Tolhurst, D. J. (1973). Psychophysical evidence for sustained and transient detectors in human vision. Journal of Physiology (London), 232, 149-162.
Kuyk, T., & Fuhr, P. S. (1993). The effects of peripheral flicker on foveal spectral sensitivity. Vision Research, 33, 627-632.
Kuyk, T., & Fuhr, P. S. (1994). Suppressive effects of peripheral flicker on foveal bichromatic mixture thresholds. Vision Research, (in revision).
Lee, B. L., Wehrhahan, C., Westheimer, G., & Kremers, J. (1993). Macaque ganglion cell responses to stimuli that elicit hyperacuity in man: detection of small displacements. Journal of Neuroscience, 13(3), 1001-1009.
Lennie, P. (1980). Parallel visual pathways: A review. Vision Research, 20, 561-594.
Lennie, P. (1984). Recent developments in the physiology of color vision. Trends in Neuroscience, 7, 243-248.
Levick, W. R., Oyster, C. W., & Davis, D. L. (1965). Evidence that McIlwain's periphery effect is not a stray light artifact. Journal of Neurophysiology, 28, 555-559.
Livingstone, M. S., & Hubel, D. H. (1987a). Psychophysical evidence for separate channels for the perception of form, color, movement, and depth. Journal of Neuroscience, 7(11), 3416-3468.
Livingstone, M. S., & Hubel, D. H. (1987b). Connections between layer 4B of area 17 and the thick cytochrome oxidase stripes of area 18 in the squirrel monkey. Journal of Neuroscience, 7(11), 3371-3377.
Livingstone, M. S., & Hubel, D. H. (1988). Segregation of form, color, movement, and depth: Anatomy, physiology, and perception. Science, 240, 740-749.
Marrocco, R. T., Carpenter, M. A., Wright, S. E., & Doran, R. A. (1987). Peripheral field stimulation suppresses flicker but not pattern detection in foveal targets. Perception and Psychophysics, 42, 337-341.
Mattingly, J. B., & Badcock, D. R. (1991). The shift-effect can be elicited with both foveal and peripheral masks. Vision Research, 31, 1251-1257.
McIlwain, J. T. (1964). Receptive fields of optic tract axons and lateral geniculate cells: peripheral extent and barbiturate sensitivity. Journal of Neurophysiology, 27, 1154-1174.
McIlwain, J. T. (1966). Some evidence concerning the physiological basis of the periphery effect in the cat's retina. Experimental Brain Research, 1, 265-271.
Merigan, W. H., Katz, L. M., & Maunsell, J. H. R. (1991). The effects of parvocellular lateral geniculate lesions on the acuity and contrast sensitivity of macaque monkeys. Journal of Neuroscience, 11, 994-1001.
Merigan, W. H., & Maunsell, J. H. R. (1993). How parallel are the primate visual pathways? Annual Review of Neuroscience, 16, 369-402. ** Schiller, P. H., & Malpeli, J. G. (1978). Functional specificity of lateral geniculate nucleus laminae of the rhesus monkey. Journal of Neurophysiology, 41, 788-797.
Shapley, R., & Perry, V. H. (1986). Cat and monkey retinal ganglion cells and their visual functional roles. Trends in Neuroscience, 9, 229-235.
Shapley, R., Kaplan, E., & Soodak, R. (1981). Spatial summation and contrast sensitivity of X and Y cells in the lateral geniculate nucleus of the macaque. Nature, 292, 543-545.
Sharpe, C. R. (1972a). A perceptual correlate of McIlwain's "periphery effect." Vision Research, 12, 519-520.
Sharpe, C. R. (1972b). The visibility and fading of thin lines visualized by their controlled movement across the retina. Journal of Physiology (London), 222, 113-134.
Sperling, H. G., & Harwerth, R. S. (1971). Red-green interactions in the increment-threshold spectral sensitivity of primates. Science, 172, 180-184. Spillman, L., & Gambone, G. V. (1971). A test of the McIlwain effect in man. Vision Research, 11, 751-753.
Tolhurst, D. J. (1975). Reaction times in the detection of gratings by human observers: A probabilistic mechanism. Vision Research, 15, 1143-1149.
Valberg, A., & Breitmeyer, B. (1980). The lateral effect of oscillation of peripheral luminance gratings: test of various hypotheses. Vision Research, 20, 789-798.
Watanabe, J., & Tasaki, K. (1980). Shift-effect in the rabbit retinal ganglion cells. Brain Research, 181, 198-201.
Werblin, F. S., & Copenhagen, D. R. (1974). Control of retinal sensitivity III. Lateral interactions at the inner plexiform layer. Journal of General Physiology, 63, 88-110.
=========================================================================
From: loop@vision.vsrc.uab.edu
try J. Neurophy. 68(4) 1992,pp1332-1344
=========================================================================
From: Mitchell Brigell <MBRIGEL@wpo.it.luc.edu>
In response to your CVnet query here are some relevant references.
Primate: Maunsell & Gibson 1992 J. Neurophysiol 68:1332-1344.
Cat: Sestokas, Lehmkule & Kratz.1991 Int J neurosci 60:59-64.
Human: Smith et al. 1995 J opt Soc Am 12:241-249.
I have attached abstracts of these and a few other relevant refs in ascii format.
-Mitch Brigell
------------------- MPLAT.CIT follows -------------------- <1> Authors Smith VC. Pokorny J. Davis M. Yeh T. Institution Visual Sciences Center, University of Chicago, Illinois 60637. Title Mechanisms subserving temporal modulation sensitivity in silent-cone substitution. Source Journal of the Optical Society of America A-Optics & Image Science. 12(2):241-9, 1995 Feb. Abstract Temporal contrast sensitivity data were collected with sine-wave-modulated lights for achromatic, chromatic, and silent-cone-substitution stimuli. Achromatic (556- and 642-nm lights in phase) and chromatic (556- and 642-nm lights in counterphase) modulation sensitivities were measured at a constant time-average retinal illuminance of 1256 trolands (Td) and chromaticity of 595 nm. These data were considered to represent isolated temporal responses of luminance and red-green chromatic channels, respectively. Silent cone substitution was achieved with counterphase modulation of the 556- and the 642-nm lights and by suitable adjustment of the modulations or the radiances of the two lights. (1) The peak modulation depth of the 642-nm light was reduced to silence the long-wavelength-sensitive (LWS) cone, and the peak modulation depth of the 556-nm light was reduced to silence the middle-wavelength-sensitive (MWS) cone. These protocols maintained the time-average retinal illuminance and chromaticity as for the control conditions. (2) The luminance of the 642-nm light was decreased to silence the LWS cone and was increased to silence the MWS cone. In this procedure the time-average retinal illuminance and chromaticity differ for the silenced-LWS-cone (1047 Td and 589.5 nm) and the silenced-MWS-cone (4358 Td and 622 nm) conditions. The response modulation of the achromatic and the chromatic channels was calculated for the silent-substitution conditions. The chromatic channel is more sensitive at low frequencies, with a transition to greater achromatic channel sensitivity near 13 Hz for the silenced-LWS-cone condition and near 6 Hz for the silenced-MWS-cone condition.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
<2> Authors Lee BB. Pokorny J. Smith VC. Kremers J. Institution Department of Neurobiology, Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry, Gottingen, Germany. Title Responses to pulses and sinusoids in macaque ganglion cells. Source Vision Research. 34(23):3081-96, 1994 Dec. Abstract The goal of the study was to compare pulse responses with sinusoidal temporal responsivity. The response of macaque ganglion cells was measured to brief luminance and chromatic pulses and to luminance or chromatic sinusoidal modulation. To make both positive and negative lobes of the pulse response visible, responses to pulses of opposite polarity were combined to yield a linearized pulse response. Tests of superposition were used to evaluate the linearized pulse response to different combinations of pulse duration and Weber contrast. A prediction of the pulse response was derived using sinusoidal responsivity functions and Fourier synthesis. For ganglion cells of the parvocellular (PC) pathway, shape and absolute amplitude of linearized pulse responses corresponded well to the predicted responses over a range of pulse durations at 0.5 and 1.0 Weber contrast for both luminance and chromatic modulation. For ganglion cells of the magnocellular (MC) pathway, shape and amplitude of the linearized pulse responses and the predicted responses corresponded when the contrast-duration product was low. This correspondence held for luminance modulation over a thousand-fold range of retinal illuminance. For contrast-duration combinations that produced a more vigorous response, over 100 imp/sec, the linearized pulse responses of MC-pathway cells became larger and time-advanced relative to the linear prediction until saturation became apparent. Incorporation of high Michelson contrast responses in the Fourier synthesis captured the timing but not the amplitude of the linearized pulse response. The data suggest that a mechanism similar to a contrast gain control acts upon MC- but not PC-pathway-cells. The data confirm that use of linear modelling to describe temporal behaviour of retinal ganglion cells is appropriate for small signals.
<3> Authors Maunsell JH. Gibson JR. Institution Department of Physiology, University of Rochester, New York 14642-8642. Title Visual response latencies in striate cortex of the macaque monkey. Source Journal of Neurophysiology. 68(4):1332-44, 1992 Oct. Abstract 1. Many lines of evidence suggest that signals relayed by the magnocellular and parvocellular subdivisions of the primate lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) maintain their segregation in cortical processing. We have examined two response properties of units in the striate cortex of macaque monkeys, latency and transience, with the goal of assessing whether they might be used to infer specific geniculate contributions. Recordings were made from 298 isolated units and 1,129 multiunit sites in the striate cortex in four monkeys. Excitotoxin lesions that selectively affected one or the other LGN subdivision were made in three animals to demonstrate directly the magnocellular and parvocellular contributions. An additional 435 single units and 551 multiunit sites were recorded after the ablations. 2. Most units in striate cortex had visual response latencies in the range of 30-50 ms under the stimulus conditions used. The earliest neuronal responses in striate cortex differed appreciably between individuals. The shortest latency recorded in the four animals ranged from 20 to 31 ms. Comparable values were obtained from both single unit and multiunit sites. After lesions were made in the magnocellular subdivision of the LGN in two animals, the shortest response latencies were 7 and 10 ms later than before the ablations. A larger lesion in the parvocellular subdivision of another animal produced no such shift. Thus it appears that the first 7-10 ms of cortical activation can be attributed to activation relayed by the magnocellular layers of the LGN. 3. The units with the shortest latencies were all found in layers 4C or 6 and their responses were among the most transient in striate cortex. Furthermore, their responses all showed a pronounced periodicity at a frequency of 50-100 Hz. This periodicity was stimulus locked, and the responses of all short-latency units oscillated in phase. 4. An index of response transience was computed for the units recorded in striate cortex. The distribution of this index was unimodal and gave no suggestion of distinct contributions from the geniculate subdivisions. Magnocellular and the parvocellular lesions affected the overall transience of responses in striate cortex. The changes, however, were very small; extremely transient responses and extremely sustained responses survived both types of lesions. 5. A characteristic profile was observed in the response latencies in superficial layers. Latencies appeared to increase monotonically from layer 4 toward the surface of cortex, with the most superficial neurons not becoming active until 15 ms after responses were observed in layer 4C.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
<4> Authors Smith VC. Lee BB. Pokorny J. Martin PR. Valberg A. Institution Department of Neurobiology, Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry, Gottingen, West Germany. Title Responses of macaque ganglion cells to the relative phase of heterochromatically modulated lights. Source Journal of Physiology. 458:191-221, 1992 Dec. Abstract 1. We measured the response of macaque ganglion cells to sinusoidally modulated red and green lights as the relative phase, theta, of the lights was varied. 2. At low frequencies, red-green ganglion cells of the parvocellular (PC-) pathway with opponent inputs from middle-wavelength sensitive (M-) and long-wavelength sensitive (L-) cones were minimally sensitive to luminance modulation (theta = 0 deg) and maximally sensitive to chromatic modulation (theta = 180 deg). With increasing frequency, the phase, theta, of minimal amplitude gradually changed, in opposite directions for cells with M- and L-cone centres. 3. At high frequencies (at and above 20 Hz), phasic cells of the magnocellular (MC-) pathway were maximally responsive when theta approximately 0 deg and minimally responsive when theta approximately 180 deg, as expected from an achromatic mechanism. At lower frequencies, the phase of minimal response shifted, for both on- and off-centre cells, to values of theta intermediate between 0 and 180 deg. This phase asymmetry was absent if the centre alone was stimulated with a small field. 4. For PC-pathway cells, it was possible to provide an account of response phase as a function of theta, using a model involving three parameters; phases of the L- and M-cone mechanisms and a L/M cone weighting term. For red-green cells, the phase parameters were monotonically related to temporal frequency and revealed a centre-surround phase difference. The phase difference was linear with a slope of 1-3 deg Hz-1. If this represents a latency difference, it would be 3-8 ms. Otherwise, temporal properties of the M- and L-cones appeared similar if not identical. By addition of a scaling term, the model could be extended to give an adequate account of the amplitude of responses. 5. We were able to activate selectively the surrounds of cells with short-wavelength (S-) cone input to their centres, and so were able to assess L/M cone weighting to the surround. M- and L-cone inputs added linearly for most cells. On average, the weighting corresponded to the Judd modification of the luminosity function although there was considerable inter-cell variability. 6. To account for results from MC-pathway cells, it was necessary to postulate a cone-opponent, chromatic input to their surrounds. We developed a receptive field model with linear summation of M- and L-cones to centre and surround, and with an additional M,L-cone opponent input to the surround.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
<5> Authors Sestokas AK. Lehmkuhle S. Kratz KE. Institution Division of Neurosurgery, Maryland Institute for E.M.S. Systems, Baltimore. Title Relationship between response latency and amplitude for ganglion and geniculate X- and Y-cells in the cat. Source International Journal of Neuroscience. 60(1-2):59-64, 1991 Sep. Abstract This study investigates the relationship between visual response latency and amplitude in the retina and dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (dLGN) of the anesthetized, paralyzed cat. The discharge rate profiles of retinal ganglion and dLGN X- and Y-cells were measured on a trial by trial basis during repeated stimulation with sinusoidal grating patterns. Latencies of response onsets and peaks were regressed linearly against different measures of response amplitude to determine the extent of covariance. In general, response amplitude was a poor predictor of response latency for both retinal ganglion and geniculate cells. The results suggest that response latency, which changes systematically with stimulus spatial frequency and/or contrast, is not a trivial consequence of discharge rate at either level of the visual system.
=========================================================================
From: hrw6@midway.uchicago.edu
Dear Dr. Beaudot:
First of all, the X/Y distinction in cats is not very similar to the magno/parvo (M/P) distinction in primates and humans, so I'll only suggest information about M and P dynamics. I believe that the two best references on temporal dynamics are:
Lee et al, Luminance and chromatic modulation sensitivity of macaque ganglion cells and human observers, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, 7, 2223-2236 (1990).
Lee et al, Responses to pulses and sinusoids in macaque ganglion cells, Vision Res. 23, 3081-3096 (1994).
Mean velocity for M cell axonal conduction is 15 m/sec, and for P cell axonal conduction is about 6m/sec. This would produce perhaps a 10 msec difference at most in transit time from the retina via the LGN to striate cortex.
I am currently completing a quantitative model for retinal function that accounts for the differences in dynamical properties between M and P cells over a 10^6 range of luminance levels. Hope this information helps you, Hugh R. Wilson
Dr. Hugh R. Wilson Visual Science Center University of Chicago 939 E. 57th Street Chicago, IL 60637 email: hrw6@midway.uchicago.edu
=========================================================================
From: brian@white.stanford.edu (Brian A Wandell)
I review some of the main differences, mainly in primates, between parvo-cellular and magno-cellular pathways in my textbook, Foundations of Vision. The principal references in those chapters are from Schiller and Malpelli (temporal) and Shapley and Kaplan (contrast). There have also been claims regarding the temporal differences and reading disabilities in humans, principally by Lovegrove and separately by Livingstone. I am away from desk just now, so I can't provide you with the specific references but I think a literature search (on-line) will turn up all of thoses references fairly directly.
Good luck with your work.
Brian Wandell __________________________________ Stanford University Phone: 415-725-2466 Fax: 415-725-5699 E-Mail: brian@white.stanford.edu
=========================================================================
From: kaplane@rockvax.rockefeller.edu
Dear William, An excellent source of information on this subject is the Ph.D. thesis of my student, Ethan Benardete. We wrote two manuscripts regarding the P cell dynamics; those are now in review. We are working on other papers regarding M cells. Ehud Kaplan The Rockefeller University, NY
=========================================================================
From: "Keith P. Purpura" <kpurpura@mail.med.cornell.edu>
Dear Dr. Beaudot: Here's one reference which may be of interest:
Purpura, K., Tranchina, D., Kaplan, E. and Shapley, R.M. Light adaptation in the primate retina: Analysis of changes in gain and dynamics of monkey retinal ganglion cells. Visual Neuroscience (1990), 4, 75-93.
-- One editorial comment: the time interval between stimulus onset and peak response shows considerable overlap for M and P cells in the monkey retina. This overlap pretty much abolishes the differences in 'timing' that may result from the fact that conduction in P cell axons is a few milliseconds slower than that for M cell axons. I think this point has been lost on those who would like to think of the M cell pathway as the 'fast' information conduit and the P cell pathway as the 'slow' channel. Futhermore, the times to peak can be influenced considerably by the properties of the visual environment, as we show in this paper.
Keith
***************************************** * Keith P. Purpura * * kpurpura@mail.med.cornell.edu * * Dept. Neurology & Neuroscience * * Cornell Univ. Medical College * * 1300 York Ave. * * New York, N.Y. 10021 * * (212) 746-6523: office * * (212) 746-8984: fax * *****************************************
=========================================================================
From: Barry Lia <barrylia@u.washington.edu>
You could start with Munk et al. (1995) Visual latencies in cytochrome oxidase bands of macaque area V2. Proc. Natl. Scad. Sci. USA 92: 988-992 and with Nowak et al. (1995) Visual latencies in aareas V1 and V2 of the macaque monkey. Visual Neuroscience 12: 371-384 and work from there.
.............................................................................. [X] Barry Lia ************* <barrylia@u.washington.edu> (206) 543-0332; FAX: 685-3157 Psychology Dept., Univ. Washington, Box 351525, Seattle, WA 98195-1525
=========================================================================
From: Andrew Carkeet <OPT_ACARKEET@mednov1.auckland.ac.nz>
Cell response properties in dLGN seem to vary depending on whether they are found in PLGN or MLGN. PLGN cells receive input from slower conducting fibres than MLGN cells, based on the measured response latency to chiasmal shock (Dreher et al, 1976; Schiller and Malpeli, 1978). In addition, PLGN responses to visual cortex retrograde electric shock are delayed compared to MLGN responses (Schiller and Malpeli, 1978). The responses of PLGN cells to briefly presented stimuli are also more persistent than MLGN cells (Dreher et al, 1976; Schiller and Malpeli, 1978).
Dreher B, Fukada Y, Rodieck RW. (1976) Identification, classification and anatomical segregation of cells with x-like and y-like properties in the lateral geniculate nucleus of old-world primates. J Physiol (Lond) 258, 433-452.
Schiller PH, Malpeli JG. (1978) Functional specificity of lateral geniculate nucleus laminae of rhesus monkey. J Neurophysiol 41, 788-797.
There are more recent findings. I think it might be fruitful to E-mail Dave Crewther in this regard.
Crewther, *David (U of New S Wales) munnari!usage.csd.unsw.oz.au!
Andrew Carkeet
=========================================================================
From: heidi@skivs.ski.org (Heidi Baseler)
Dear Dr. Beaudot,
I am a graduate student currently working at the Smith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute in San Francisco. My doctoral dissertation has to do with magno and parvo contributions to the visual evoked potential (VEP), so magno/parvo dynamics are of great interest to me as well. Here are some references I have found useful regarding the temporal and transmission properties of M and P cells (in alphabetical order):
Benardete, E.A., Kaplan, E. & Knight (1992). Contrast gain control in the primate retina: P cells are not X-like, some M cells are. Visual Neuroscience, 8, 483-486.
Bullier, J., Nowak, L.G., Munk, M.H.J. and Girard, P. (1994) Visual response latencies are shortest in the magnocellular pathway within areas V1 and V2 of macaque cortex. Society for Neuroscience Abstracts, 20: 837.
Derrington, A.M. and Lennie, P. (1984) Spatial and temporal contrast sensitivities of neurones in lateral geniculate nucleus of macaque. Journal of Physiology, 357: 219-240.
Maunsell, J.H.R. & Gibson, J.R. (1992). Visual response latencies in striate cortex of the macaque monkey. Journal of Neurophysiology, 68, 1332-1344.
Munk MH; Nowak LG; Girard P; Chounlamountri N; Bullier J. (1995) Visual latencies in cytochrome oxidase bands of macaque area V2. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 92(4): 988-92.
Stanford, L.R. (1987) Conduction velocity variations minimize conduction time differences among retinal ganglion cell axons. Science, 238: 358-360.
The above references were all from monkeys. There are also a number of papers dealingwith X and Y cell dynamics in cats (by J.D. Victor, R.M. Shapley and C. Enroth-Cugell), but according to Benardete et al., the X/Y division in cats may not be entirely relevant to primates. Not much is known in humans about M/P dynamics. However, in my own research, I found two components in the human VEP that appear to reflect M and P contributions. The putative "M" component peaks around 60-70 ms, while the putative "P" component peaked between 75 and 115 ms (depending on eccentricity).
Sincerely,
Heidi Baseler
=========================================================================
From: Anna Roe <anna@DNA.NEUSC.BCM.TMC.EDU>
In response to your CVNet inquiry:
Munk et al (1995) Visual latencies in cytochrome oxidase bands of macaque area V2. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92:988-992.
Nowak et al (1995) Visual latencies in areas V1 and V2 of the macaque monkey. Vis Neurosci 12:371-384.
Maunsell and Gibson (1992) Visual response latencies in striate cortex of the macaque monkey. J Neurophysiol 68:1332-1344.
Raiguel et al (1989) Response latencies of visual cells in macaque areas V1, V2, and V5. Brain Res 493:155-159.
Troy and Lennie (1987) Detection latencies of X and Y type cells of the cat's dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus. Exp Brain Res 65:703-706.
Also talk to Charlie E. Schroeder at Albert Einstein in NY. He had a poster a couple years ago on visual latencies throughout the visual system.
Hope this helps.
Anna W. Roe Division of Neuroscience Baylor College of Medicine
=========================================================================
From: "Peter D. Spear" <pdspear@facstaff.wisc.edu>
Some data and references are available in Spear et al., Journal of Neurophysiology, 1994:72 (1), 402-420.
Peter D. Spear Phone: (608) 262-0837 Department of Psychology Email: pdspear@facstaff.wisc.edu University of Wisconsin FAX: (608) 262-4029 1202 West Johnson St. Madison, WI 53706
=========================================================================
From: S.J.Anderson@aston.ac.uk (Steve Anderson)
Hi,
you might take a look at Anderson SJ 1993, Vision Res. 33, 2733-2746 (Visual processing delays alter the perceived spatial form of moving gratings). In that paper, you will also find many references on the topic of processing delays.
hope this helps
Steve Anderson
=========================================================================
From: Tatsuya Yoshizawa <yoshi@orchid.mattolab.kanazawa-it.ac.jp>
Dear Dr.William,
I know the references. I studied temporal properties of chromatic channels when I was doctor candidate. You can obtain the data or the references by the following paper.
Livingstone and Hubel, J. Nerosci., 7, 11, 3416-3468,1987 Tatsuya Yoshizawa, PhD Matto laboratories for Human Information Systems Kanazawa Institute of Technology yoshi@orchid.mattolab.kanazawa-it.ac.jp
=========================================================================
From: <angel@iph.bio.acad.bg> (Angel Vassilev)
Dear Dr. Beaudot,
The following sources are relevant to the parvo- magno delays:
Vassilev A., Stomonyakov V., Manahilov V. (1994): Spatial-frequency specific contrast gain and flicker masking of human transient VEP. Vision Res. 34, 863-872 (the data in the paper and part of the references).
Vassilev A., Stomonyakov v. (1987). The effect of grating spatial frequency on the early VEP component CI. Vision Res. 27, 727-729.
Nowak L. G., Munk M. H. J., Girard P., Bullier J. (1995). Visual latencies in areas V1 and V2 of the macaque monkey. Visual Neuroscience 12, 371-384.
Best wishes, Angel Vassilev
=========================================================================
From: NOWAK@BIOMED.MED.YALE.EDU
"Visual latencies in areas V1 and V2 of the macaque monkey" by L.G. Nowak, M.H.J. Munk, P. Girard and J. Bullier. Visual Neuroscience 12:371-384, 1995.
Munk MH; Nowak LG; Girard P; Chounlamountri N; Bullier J. (1995) Visual latencies in cytochrome oxidase bands of macaque area V2. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 92(4): 988-92.
Nowak LG, Munk MHJ, Chounlamountri N, Bullier J (1994) Temporal aspects of information processing in areas V1 and V2 of the macaque monkey. In: C. Pantev (editor), Oscillatory Event-Related Brain Dynamics. Plenum Press, New York, 1994, pp. 85-98
Bullier J, Munk MHJ, Nowak LG (1993) Corticocortical connections sustain interarea synchonization. Concepts in Neuroscience, Vol. 4, No 2, 159-174
Bullier J, Nowak LG (1995) Parallel versus serial processing: new vistas on the distributed organization of the visual system. Submitted to Current Opinion in Neurobiology, Vol. 5
Nowak LG (1995) Etude electrophysiologique des aspects temporels du traitement de l'information dans le neocortex visuel. These de Doctorat, Universite Claude Bernard-LyonI, France
=========================================================================
Some recent references for X/Y pathways:
AU Hamamoto-J. Cheng-H. Yoshida-K. Smith-III-E-L. Chino-Y-M. TI Transfer characteristics of lateral geniculate nucleus X-neurons in the cat : effects of temporal frequency. SO Exp-Brain-Res. 1994 98(2) P 191-199
AU Lo-F-S. Sherman-S-M. TI Feedback inhibition in the cat's lateral geniculate nucleus. SO Exp-Brain-Res. 1994 100(2) P 365.
AU Lu-S-M. Guido-W. Vaughan-J-W. Sherman-S-M. TI Latency variability of responses to visual stimuli in cells of the cat's lateral geniculate nucleus. SO Exp-Brain-Res. 1995 105(1) P 7-17
----- End Included Message -----