Literature DB >> 21068268

Population anisotropy in area MT explains a perceptual difference between near and far disparity motion segmentation.

Finnegan J Calabro1, Lucia M Vaina.   

Abstract

Segmentation of the visual scene into relevant object components is a fundamental process for successfully interacting with our surroundings. Many visual cues, including motion and binocular disparity, support segmentation, yet the mechanisms using these cues are unclear. We used a psychophysical motion discrimination task in which noise dots were displaced in depth to investigate the role of segmentation through disparity cues in visual motion stimuli (experiment 1). We found a subtle, but significant, bias indicating that near disparity noise disrupted the segmentation of motion more than equidistant far disparity noise. A control experiment showed that the near-far difference could not be attributed to attention (experiment 2). To account for the near-far bias, we constructed a biologically constrained model using recordings from neurons in the middle temporal area (MT) to simulate human observers' performance on experiment 1. Performance of the model of MT neurons showed a near-disparity skew similar to that shown by human observers. To isolate the cause of the skew, we simulated performance of a model containing units derived from properties of MT neurons, using phase-modulated Gabor disparity tuning. Using a skewed-normal population distribution of preferred disparities, the model reproduced the elevated motion discrimination thresholds for near-disparity noise, whereas a skewed-normal population of phases (creating individually asymmetric units) did not lead to any performance skew. Results from the model suggest that the properties of neurons in area MT are computationally sufficient to perform disparity segmentation during motion processing and produce similar disparity biases as those produced by human observers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21068268      PMCID: PMC3023382          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00725.2009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  34 in total

Review 1.  Neural model of first-order and second-order motion perception and magnocellular dynamics.

Authors:  A A Baloch; S Grossberg; E Mingolla; C A Nogueira
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 2.129

2.  Motion-induced blindness in normal observers.

Authors:  Y S Bonneh; A Cooperman; D Sagi
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2001-06-14       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  The effects of occlusion and past experience on the allocation of object-based attention.

Authors:  J Pratt; A B Sekuler
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-12

4.  Modulating motion-induced blindness with depth ordering and surface completion.

Authors:  Erich W Graf; Wendy J Adams; Martin Lages
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Interaction of stereo vision and optic flow processing revealed by an illusory stimulus.

Authors:  A Grigo; M Lappe
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 1.886

Review 6.  A neural substrate of prediction and reward.

Authors:  W Schultz; P Dayan; P R Montague
Journal:  Science       Date:  1997-03-14       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Mechanisms of contour perception in monkey visual cortex. II. Contours bridging gaps.

Authors:  E Peterhans; R von der Heydt
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  An illusory transformation of optic flow fields.

Authors:  C J Duffy; R H Wurtz
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Functional properties of neurons in middle temporal visual area of the macaque monkey. II. Binocular interactions and sensitivity to binocular disparity.

Authors:  J H Maunsell; D C Van Essen
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Segregation of computations underlying perception of motion discontinuity and coherence.

Authors:  L M Vaina; N M Grzywacz; R Kikinis
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  1994-11-21       Impact factor: 1.837

View more
  1 in total

1.  Simple reaction times to cyclopean stimuli reveal that the binocular system is tuned to react faster to near than to far objects.

Authors:  Gábor Horváth; Vanda A Nemes; János Radó; András Czigler; Béla Török; Péter Buzás; Gábor Jandó
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.