In pursuing our work on the organization of human visual cortex, we wanted to specify more accurately the position of the visual motion area (area V5) in relation to the sulcal and gyral pattern of the cerebral cortex. We also wanted to determine the intersubject variation of area V5 in terms of position and extent of blood flow change in it, in response to the same task. We therefore used positron emission tomography (PET) to determine the foci of relative cerebral blood flow increases produced when subjects viewed a moving checkerboard pattern, compared to viewing the same pattern when it was stationary. We coregistered the PET images from each subject with images of the same brain obtained by magnetic resonance imaging, thus relating the position of V5 in all 24 hemispheres examined to the individual gyral configuration of the same brains. This approach also enabled us to examine the extent to which results obtained by pooling the PET data from a small group of individuals (e.g., six), chosen at random, would be representative of a much larger sample in determining the mean location of V5 after transformation into Talairach coordinates. After stereotaxic transformation of each individual brain, we found that the position of area V5 can vary by as much as 27 mm in the left hemisphere and 18 mm in the right for the pixel with the highest significance for blood flow change. There is also an intersubject variability in blood flow change within it in response to the same visual task. V5 nevertheless bears a consistent relationship, within each brain, to the sulcal pattern of the occipital lobe. It is situated ventrolaterally, just posterior to the meeting point of the ascending limb of the inferior temporal sulcus and the lateral occipital sulcus. In position it corresponds almost precisely with Flechsig's Feld 16, one of the areas that he found to be myelinated at birth.

The descending projections from motor cortex share many features with top-down or backward connections in visual cortex; for example, corticospinal projections originate in infragranular layers, are highly divergent and (along with descending cortico-cortical projections) target cells expressing NMDA receptors. This is somewhat paradoxical because backward modulatory characteristics would not be expected of driving motor command signals. We resolve this apparent paradox using a functional characterisation of the motor system based on Helmholtz’s ideas about perception; namely, that perception is inference on the causes of visual sensations. We explain behaviour in terms of inference on the causes of proprioceptive sensations. This explanation appeals to active inference, in which higher cortical levels send descending proprioceptive predictions, rather than motor commands. This process mirrors perceptual inference in sensory cortex, where descending connections convey predictions, while ascending connections convey prediction errors. The anatomical substrate of this recurrent message passing is a hierarchical system consisting of functionally asymmetric driving (ascending) and modulatory (descending) connections: an arrangement that we show is almost exactly recapitulated in the motor system, in terms of its laminar, topographic and physiological characteristics. This perspective casts classical motor reflexes as minimising prediction errors and may provide a principled explanation for why motor cortex is agranular.

Patterns of anatomical connections in the visual cortex form the structural basis for segregating features of the visual image into separate cortical areas and for communication between these areas at all levels to produce a coherent percept. Such multi-stage integration may be a common strategy throughout the cortex for producing complex behaviour.

The pulvinar is an 'associative' thalamic nucleus, meaning that most of its input and output relationships are formed with the cerebral cortex. The function of this circuitry is little understood and its anatomy, though much investigated, is notably recondite. This is because pulvinar connection patterns disrespect the architectural subunits (anterior, medial, lateral and inferior pulvinar nuclei) that have been the traditional reference system. This article presents a simplified, global model of the organization of cortico-pulvinar connections so as to pursue their structure-function relationships. Connections between the cortex and pulvinar are topographically organized, and as a result the pulvinar contains a 'map' of the cortical sheet. However, the topography is very blurred. Hence the pulvinar connection zones of nearby cortical areas overlap, allowing indirect transcortical communication via the pulvinar. A general observation is that indirect cortico-pulvino-cortical circuits tend to mimic direct cortico-cortical pathways: this is termed 'the replication principle'. It is equally apt for certain pairs (or groups) of nearby cortical areas that happen not to connect with each other. The 'replication' of this non-connection is achieved by discontinuities and dislocations of the cortical topography within the pulvinar, such that the associated pair of connection zones do not overlap. Certain of these deformations can be used to divide the global cortical topography into specific sub-domains, which form the natural units of a connectional subdivision of the pulvinar. A substantial part of the pulvinar also expresses visual topography, reflecting visual maps in occipital cortex. There are just two well-ordered visual maps in the pulvinar, that both receive projections from area V1, and several other occipital areas; the resulting duplication of cortical topography means that each visual map also acts as a separate connection domain. In summary, the model identifies four topographically ordered connection domains, and reconciles the coexistence of visual and cortical maps in two of them. The replication principle operates at and below the level of domain structure. It is argued that cortico-pulvinar circuitry replicates the pattern of cortical circuitry but not its function, playing a more regulatory role instead. Thalamic neurons differ from cortical neurons in their inherent rhythmicity, and the pattern of cortico-thalamic connections must govern the formation of specific resonant circuits. The broad implication is that the pulvinar acts to coordinate cortical information processing by facilitating and sustaining the formation of synchronized trans-areal assemblies; a more pointed suggestion is that, owing to the considerable blurring of cortical topography in the pulvinar, rival cortical assemblies may be in competition to recruit thalamic elements in order to outlast each other in activity.

We have compared physiological data recorded from three alert macaque monkeys with separate observations of local connectivity, to locate and characterize the functional border between two related but distinct visual areas on the caudal face of the superior parietal gyrus. We refer to these areas as V6 and V6A. The occupy almost the entire extent of the anterior bank of the parieto-occipital sulcus, V6A being the more dorsal. These two areas are strongly interconnected. Anatomically, we have defined the border as the point at which labelled axon terminals first adopt a recognizably 'descending' pattern in their laminar characteristics, after injections of wheatgerm agglutinin-horseradish peroxidase into the dorsal half of the gyrus (in presumptive V6A). A similar principle was used to recognize the same border by the pattern of input from area V5, except that in this case the relevant transition in laminar characteristics is that between an 'intermediate' pattern (in V6) and an 'ascending' pattern (in V6A). V6A was found to be distinct from V6 in a number of its physiological properties. Unlike V6, it contains visually unresponsive cells as well as units with craniotopic receptive fields ('real-position' cells), units tuned to very slow stimulus speeds, units with complex visual selectivities and units with activity related to attention. V6A was also found to have a larger mean receptive field size and scatter than V6. By contrast, response properties related to the basic orientation and direction of moving bar stimuli were indistinguishable between V6 and V6A, as was the influence of gaze direction on cell activity in the two areas. Two-dimensional maps of the recording sites allowed reconstruction of the V6/V6A border. For comparison, the anatomical results were rendered on two-dimensional maps of identical format to those used to summarize the physiological data. After normalizing for relative size, the physiological and connectional estimates of the border between V6 and V6A were found to coincide, at least within the range of individual variation between hemispheres. An architectonic map in the same format was also made from a hemisphere stained for myelin and Nissl substance. Area PO, defined by its general density of myelination was not distinct in this material, but several architectural features were traceable and one of these was also found to approximate the V6/V6A border. The particular criteria that distinguish V6 from V6A differ from a recent description of areas PO and POd in the Cebus monkey; we believe it most likely that PO and POd together may correspond to V6.

V5 and V4 are areas of macaque monkey prestriate visual cortex that are specialized for involvement in different aspects of visual perception, namely motion for V5 (refs 1-4) and colour vision, with other possible functions, for V4 (refs 2, 5-9). Thus, it is unlikely that they should be fed the same information for further processing, yet both receive a strong input from patches of the upper layers of V2 (refs 10, 11), the area immediately adjoining the primary visual cortex, V1. V2, however, seems to comprise functionally distinct subregions, which can be revealed by staining the tissue for the mitochondrial enzyme cytochrome oxidase. Here we report that V4 and V5 are connected with separate cytochrome oxidase-defined subregions of V2, suggesting that cortical pathways dealing with motion and colour perception are segregated in their passage through V2, and reinforcing evidence for functional specialization in the visual cortex.

This paper considers neuronal architectures from a computational perspective and asks what aspects of neuroanatomy and neurophysiology can be disclosed by the nature of neuronal computations? In particular, we extend current formulations of the brain as an organ of inference—based upon hierarchical predictive coding—and consider how these inferences are orchestrated. In other words, what would the brain require to dynamically coordinate and contextualize its message passing to optimize its computational goals? The answer that emerges rests on the delicate (modulatory) gain control of neuronal populations that select and coordinate (prediction error) signals that ascend cortical hierarchies. This is important because it speaks to a hierarchical anatomy of extrinsic (between region) connections that form two distinct classes, namely a class of driving (first-order) connections that are concerned with encoding the content of neuronal representations and a class of modulatory (second-order) connections that establish context—in the form of the salience or precision ascribed to content. We explore the implications of this distinction from a formal perspective (using simulations of feature–ground segregation) and consider the neurobiological substrates of the ensuing precision-engineered dynamics, with a special focus on the pulvinar and attention.

No abstract