Interindividual and interspecies variations of the extrastriate visual cortex

Ejima, Yoshimichi; Takahashi, Shingo; Yamamoto, Hidehiko; Fukunaga, Masaki; Tanaka, Chuzo; Ebisu, Toshihiko; Umeda, Masahiro

doi:10.1097/00001756-200308260-00008

Cited by 22 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…4 B). At eccentricities greater than 1.5°, CMFs of hV4 and LO1 were significantly smaller than those of V2 and V3, reflecting the smaller size of hV4 and LO1, and a relatively greater representation of the central visual field in the areas (center bias), as previously reported (Ejima et al, 2003;Brewer et al, 2005;Larsson and Heeger, 2006).…”

Section: Data Grouped Across Subjects Show Population Point Image Decsupporting

confidence: 75%

The Relationship between Cortical Magnification Factor and Population Receptive Field Size in Human Visual Cortex: Constancies in Cortical Architecture

Harvey¹,

Dumoulin²

2011

J. Neurosci.

298

340

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Receptive field (RF) sizes and cortical magnification factor (CMF) are fundamental organization properties of the visual cortex. At increasing visual eccentricity, RF sizes increase and CMF decreases. A relationship between RF size and CMF suggests constancies in cortical architecture, as their product, the cortical representation of an RF (point image), may be constant. Previous animal neurophysiology studies of this question yield conflicting results. Here, we use fMRI to determine the relationship between the population RF (pRF) and CMF in humans. In average and individual data, the product of CMF and pRF size, the population point image, is near constant, decreasing slightly with eccentricity in V1. Interhemisphere and subject variations in CMF, pRF size, and V1 surface area are correlated, and the population point image varies less than these properties. These results suggest a V1 cortical processing architecture of approximately constant size between humans. Up the visual hierarchy, to V2, V3, hV4, and LO1, the population point image decreases with eccentricity, and both the absolute values and rate of change increase. PRF sizes increase between visual areas and with eccentricity, but when expressed in V1 cortical surface area (i.e., corticocortical pRFs), they are constant across eccentricity in V2/V3. Thus, V2/V3, and to some degree hV4, sample from a constant extent of V1. This may explain population point image changes in later areas. Consequently, the constant factor determining pRF size may not be the relationship to the local CMF, but rather pRF sizes and CMFs in visual areas from which the pRF samples.

show abstract

Section: Data Grouped Across Subjects Show Population Point Image Decsupporting

confidence: 75%

The Relationship between Cortical Magnification Factor and Population Receptive Field Size in Human Visual Cortex: Constancies in Cortical Architecture

Harvey¹,

Dumoulin²

2011

J. Neurosci.

298

340

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, visual field eccentricity calculations are the same for V3d and V3v [51,54]. Thus, it can be argued that V3d and V3v are likely to be similar in function, since these distinct quarter-field representations do not have different dedications for the fovea versus peripheral vision.…”

Section: Human Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Evidence For a Cmentioning

confidence: 99%

The case for primate V3

Lyon

Connolly

2011

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The visual system in primates is represented by a remarkably large expanse of the cerebral cortex. While more precise investigative studies that can be performed in non-human primates contribute towards understanding the organization of the human brain, there are several issues of visual cortex organization in monkey species that remain unresolved. In all, more than 20 areas comprise the primate visual cortex, yet there is little agreement as to the exact number, size and visual field representation of all but three. A case in point is the third visual area, V3. It is found relatively early in the visual system hierarchy, yet over the last 40 years its organization and even its very existence have been a matter of debate among prominent neuroscientists. In this review, we discuss a large body of recent work that provides straightforward evidence for the existence of V3. In light of this, we then re-examine results from several seminal reports and provide parsimonious re-interpretations in favour of V3. We conclude with analysis of human and monkey functional magnetic resonance imaging literature to make the case that a complete V3 is an organizational feature of all primate species and may play a greater role in the dorsal stream of visual processing.

show abstract

“…Human observers predominantly perceive the global structure of the stimuli, rather than each constituent element, while nonhuman primates sometimes do not selective attention of nonhuman primates may be oriented toward more local spatial areas that more strongly activate lower visual areas. Thus, visual processing in nonhuman primates may rely on lower visual areas in comparison with that in humans, who have well developed and enlarged higher visual areas (Ejima et al 2003). According to another recently proposed model (Hochstein and Ahissar 2002;Vandenbroucke et al 2008), locally persistent perception may be explained by an imbalance between feedforward and feedback processing; detailed perception may be caused by relatively stronger feedback activities, referring to detailed information, than feedforward activities, which involve spatially integrating the information.…”

Section: Perceptual Organizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative psychophysical approach to visual perception in primates

Matsuno

Fujita

2009

Primates

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies on the visual processing of primates, which have well developed visual systems, provide essential information about the perceptual bases of their higher-order cognitive abilities. Although the mechanisms underlying visual processing are largely shared between human and nonhuman primates, differences have also been reported. In this article, we review psychophysical investigations comparing the basic visual processing that operates in human and nonhuman species, and discuss the future contributions potentially deriving from such comparative psychophysical approaches to primate minds.

show abstract

Interindividual and interspecies variations of the extrastriate visual cortex

Cited by 22 publications

References 25 publications

The Relationship between Cortical Magnification Factor and Population Receptive Field Size in Human Visual Cortex: Constancies in Cortical Architecture

The Relationship between Cortical Magnification Factor and Population Receptive Field Size in Human Visual Cortex: Constancies in Cortical Architecture

The case for primate V3

A comparative psychophysical approach to visual perception in primates

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About