EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,214,146
Abstracts:
29,074,682
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on Google+Follow on Google+
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Neurometabolic coupling differs for suppression within and beyond the classical receptive field in visual cortex


Journal of Physiology 589(Pt 13): 3175-3190
Neurometabolic coupling differs for suppression within and beyond the classical receptive field in visual cortex
Neurons in visual cortex exhibit two major types of stimulus elicited suppression. One, cross-orientation suppression, occurs within the classical receptive field (CRF) when an orthogonal grating is superposed on one at optimal orientation. The second, surround suppression, occurs when the size of an optimally oriented grating extends beyond the CRF. Previous proposals suggest that intracortical inhibition is responsible for surround suppression whereas feedforward processes may underlie cross-orientation suppression. To gain more insight concerning these types of suppression, we have included measurements of metabolic function in addition to neural responses. We made co-localized measurements of multiple unit neural activity and tissue oxygen concentrations in the striate cortex of anaesthetized cats while using visual stimuli to activate the two kinds of suppression. Results show that the amplitude of the initial negative oxygen response increases with stimulus size but neural responses decrease as size extends beyond the CRF. This shows that oxygen consumption increases with stimulus size regardless of reduced neural response. On the other hand, amplitudes of both the initial negative oxygen component and the neural responses are simultaneously attenuated by the orthogonal mask in cross-orientation suppression. These different neurometabolic response patterns are consistent with suggestions that the two types of suppressive processes arise from different neural mechanisms.

(PDF same-day service: $19.90)

Accession: 054585278

PMID: 21558164

DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2011.205039



Related references

Asymmeytric suppression outside the classical receptive field of the visual cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 19(23): 10536-10553, Dec 1, 1999

Contrast-dependent variations in the excitatory classical receptive field and suppressive nonclassical receptive field of cat primary visual cortex. Cerebral Cortex 23(2): 283-292, 2013

Beyond the classical receptive field in the visual cortex. Progress in Brain Research 134: 157-170, 2001

Gain control from beyond the classical receptive field in primate primary visual cortex. Visual Neuroscience 20(3): 221-230, 2003

Selective suppression from visual stimuli outside the classical receptive field of neurons in monkey superior colliculus. Society For Neuroscience Abstracts: 1006, 1985

Predictive coding in the visual cortex: a functional interpretation of some extra-classical receptive-field effects. Nature Neuroscience 2(1): 79-87, 1999

Stimuli outside the classical receptive field modulate the synchronization of action potentials between cells in visual cortex of cats. Neuroreport 11(6): 1313-1317, 2000

Cells in cat visual cortex are sharply orientation tuned to stimuli excluding the centre of the classical receptive field. Society for Neuroscience Abstracts 27(1): 748, 2001

Concurrent visual stimulation of the receptive field periphery affects phase of responses to stimuli in the classical receptive field. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science 30(3 SUPPL): 297, 1989

Dynamic functional connectivity among neuronal population during modulation of extra-classical receptive field in primary visual cortex. Brain Research Bulletin 117: 45-53, 2016