Motion-responsive regions of the human brain

Abstract

Functional magnetic resonance imaging was used to map motion responsive regions of the human brain by contrasting passive viewing of moving and stationary randomly textured patterns. Regions were retained as motion responsive if they reached significance either in the group analysis or in the majority of hemispheres in single-subject analysis. They include well-known regions, such as V1, hMT/V5+, and hV3A, but also several occipito-temporal, occipito-parietal, parietal, and frontal regions. The time course of the activation was similar in most of these regions. Motion responses were nearly identical for binocular and monocular presentations. Flicker-induced-activation introduced a dichotomy amongst these motion responsive regions. Early occipital and occipito-temporal regions responded well to flicker, while flicker responses gradually vanished as one moved to occipito-parietal and then parietal regions. Finally, over a more than four-fold range, stimulus diameter had little effect on the motion activations, except in V1.

A double dissociation between striate and extrastriate visual cortex for pattern motion perception revealed using rTMS

“…It would not therefore have been possible to administer rTMS any closer to the fMRI-defined motion-sensitive cortical areas. Figure 3 also shows that the optimal phosphene induction sites are generally slightly posterior to area V5 suggesting that the stimulation may have targeted V5 and/or posterior extrastriate visual areas such as V3/V3a [Sunaert et al, 1999;Tootell et al, 1997], which contain pattern motion responsive neurons [Gegenfurtner et al, 1997].…”

Visual-vestibular processing in the human Sylvian fissure

“…Area PIC is primarily characterized by its pronounced responsiveness to visual object motion cues (Beer et al 2009;Claeys et al 2003;Orban et al 2003;Sunaert et al 1999). Therefore, a standard visual object motion localizer was used to define PIC in individual participants (see .…”

“…This localizer was designed to activate visual motion processing without any accompanying sensations of self motion induced by the visual stimulus. This approach was chosen to make the definition of PIC more comparable to previous descriptions of this area in studies employing basic object motion cues that do not elicit self-motion sensations (Beer et al 2009;Claeys et al 2003;Orban et al 2003;Sunaert et al 1999). The probability of self-motion sensations in the current localizer was minimized by switching coherent motion directions every second.…”

“…For the visual localizer a larger pool of participants, who completed this localizer scan between the years 2011 and 2015 for various studies in our laboratory, was included (n ϭ 86, including participants from the current study, 44 females, 18 -54 yr old). This was necessary because PIC is small and varies substantially in location between participants, which renders detection in a group analysis difficult Orban et al 2003;Sunaert et al 1999).…”

“…Regions-of-interest (ROIs) were defined on each participant's inflated cortical surfaces at a false-discovery-rate corrected threshold of p Ͻ 0.05. The definition of area PIC was guided by previous descriptions (Beer et al 2009;Claeys et al 2003;Orban et al 2003;Sunaert et al 1999). In two participants PIC could only be defined in one hemisphere.…”