Information is integrated across the visual field to transform local features into a global percept. We now know that V1 neurons provide more spatial integration than originally thought due to the existence of their nonclassical inhibitory surrounds. To understand spatial integration in the visual cortex, we have studied the nature and extent of center and surround influences on neuronal response. We used drifting sinusoidal gratings in circular and annular apertures to estimate the sizes of the receptive field's excitatory center and suppressive surround. We used combinations of stimuli inside and outside the receptive field to explore the nature of the surround influence on the receptive field center as a function of the relative and absolute contrast of stimuli in the two regions. We conclude that the interaction is best explained as a divisive modulation of response gain by signals from the surround. We then develop a receptive field model based on the ratio of signals from Gaussian-shaped center and surround mechanisms. We show that this model can account well for the variations in receptive field size with contrast that we and others have observed and for variations in size with the state of contrast adaptation. The model achieves this success by simple variations in the relative gain of the two component mechanisms of the receptive field. This model thus offers a parsimonious explanation of a variety of phenomena involving changes in apparent receptive field size and accounts for these phenomena purely in terms of two receptive field mechanisms that do not themselves change in size. We used the extent of the center mechanism in our model as an indicator of the spatial extent of the central excitatory portion of the receptive field. We compared the extent of the center to measurements of horizontal connections within V1 and determined that horizontal intracortical connections are well matched in extent to the receptive field center mechanism. Input to the suppressive surround may come in part from feedback signals from higher areas.

Selectivity and spatial distribution of signals from the receptive field surround in macaque V1 neurons. J Neurophysiol 88: 2547-2556, 2002; 10.1152/jn.00693.2001. The responsiveness of neurons in V1 is modulated by stimuli placed outside their classical receptive fields. This nonclassical surround provides input from a larger portion of the visual scene than originally thought, permitting integration of information at early levels in the visual processing stream. Signals from the surround have been reported variously to be suppressive and facilitatory, selective and unselective. We tested the specificity of influences from the surround by studying the interactions between drifting sinusoidal gratings carefully confined to conservatively defined center and surround regions. We found that the surround influence was always suppressive when the surround grating was at the neuron's preferred orientation. Suppression tended to be stronger when the surround grating also moved in the neuron's preferred direction, rather than its opposite. When the orientation in the surround was 90°from the preferred orientation (orthogonal), suppression was weaker, and facilitation was sometimes evident. The tuning of surround signals therefore tended to match the tuning of the center, though the tuning of the surround was somewhat broader. The tuning of suppression also depended on the contrast of the center grating-when the center grating was reduced in contrast, orthogonal surround stimuli became relatively more suppressive. We also found evidence for the tuning of the surround being dependent to some degree on the stimulus used in the center-suppression was often stronger for a given center stimulus when the parameters of the surround grating matched the parameters of the center grating even when the center grating was not itself of the optimal direction or orientation. We also explored the spatial distribution of surround influence and found an orderly relationship between the orientation of grating patches presented to regions of the surround and the position of greatest suppression. When surround gratings were oriented parallel to the preferred orientation of the receptive field, suppression was strongest at the receptive field ends. When surround gratings were orthogonal, suppression was strongest on the flanks. We conclude that the surround has complex effects on responses from the classical receptive field. We suggest that the underlying mechanism of this complexity may involve interactions between relatively simple center and surround mechanisms.

Iso-orientation surround suppression is a powerful form of visual contextual modulation in which a stimulus of the preferred orientation of a neuron placed outside the classical receptive field (CRF) of the neuron suppresses the response to stimuli within the CRF. This suppression is most often attributed to orientation-tuned signals that propagate laterally across the cortex, activating local inhibition. By studying the temporal properties of surround suppression, we have uncovered characteristics that challenge standard notions of surround suppression. We found that the latency of suppression depended on its strength. Across cells, strong suppression arrived on average 30 msec earlier than weak suppression, and suppression sometimes arrived faster than the excitatory CRF response. We compared the relative latency of CRF response onset and offset with the relative latency of suppression onset and offset. Response onset was delayed relative to response offset in the CRF but not in the surround. This is not the expected result if neurons targeted by suppression are like those that generate it. We examined the time course of suppression as a function of distance of the surround stimulus from the CRF and found that suppression was predominantly sustained for nearby stimuli and predominantly transient for distant stimuli. By comparing the latency of suppression for nearby and distant stimuli, we found that orientation-tuned suppression could effectively propagate across 6 -8 mm of cortex at ϳ1 m/sec. This is considerably faster than expected for horizontal cortical connections previously implicated in surround suppression. We offer refinements to circuits for surround suppression that account for these results and describe how feedback from cells with large CRFs can account for the rapid propagation of suppression within V1.

Amblyopia is a developmental disorder of pattern vision. After surgical creation of esotropic strabismus in the first weeks of life or after wearing -10 diopter contact lenses in one eye to simulate anisometropia during the first months of life, macaques often develop amblyopia. We studied the response properties of visual cortex neurons in six amblyopic macaques; three monkeys were anisometropic, and three were strabismic. In all monkeys, cortical binocularity was reduced. In anisometropes, the amblyopic eye influenced a relatively small proportion of cortical neurons; in strabismics, the influence of the two eyes was more nearly equal. The severity of amblyopia was related to the relative strength of the input of the amblyopic eye to the cortex only for the more seriously affected amblyopes. Measurements of the spatial frequency tuning and contrast sensitivity of cortical neurons showed few differences between the eyes for the three less severe amblyopes (two strabismic and one anisometropic). In the three more severely affected animals (one strabismic and two anisometropic), the optimal spatial frequency and spatial resolution of cortical neurons driven by the amblyopic eye were substantially and significantly lower than for neurons driven by the nonamblyopic eye. There were no reliable differences in neuronal contrast sensitivity between the eyes. A sample of neurons recorded from cortex representing the peripheral visual field showed no interocular differences, suggesting that the effects of amblyopia were more pronounced in portions of the cortex subserving foveal vision. Qualitatively, abnormalities in both the eye dominance and spatial properties of visual cortex neurons were related on a case-by-case basis to the depth of amblyopia. Quantitative analysis suggests, however, that these abnormalities alone do not explain the full range of visual deficits in amblyopia. Studies of extrastriate cortical areas may uncover further abnormalities that explain these deficits.