Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 437

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Visuospatial coding in primate prefrontal neurons revealed by oculomotor paradigms

Funahashi, S., Bruce, C. J., Goldman-Rakic, P. S.·1990·Journal of Neurophysiology
DOI 10.1152/jn.1990.63.4.814
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

1. Visual responses and their relationship to delay-period activity were studied by recording single neuron activity from the prefrontal cortex of rhesus monkeys while they performed an oculomotor delayed-response (ODR) and a visual probe (VP) task. In the ODR task, the monkey was required to maintain fixation of a central spot of light throughout the cue (0.5 s) and delay (3 s) periods and then make a saccadic eye movement to one of four or eight locations where the visual cue had been presented. In the VP task, the same visual stimuli that were used in the ODR task were presented for 0.5 s, but no response was required. The VP task was thus employed to test the passive visual response and, by comparison with cue-elicited activity in the ODR task, to examine the degree of behavioral enhancement present in prefrontal visual activity. 2. Among 434 neurons recorded from the prefrontal cortex within and surrounding the principal sulcus (PS), 261 had task-related activity during at least one phase of the ODR task, and 74 of these had phasic visual responses to the onset of the visual cues with a median latency of 116 ms. The visual responses of 69 neurons were excitatory, and 5 neurons were inhibited. Five of the neurons with excitatory visual responses also responded transiently after the offset of the cue. 3. Visual responses were classified as directional for 71 PS neurons (96%) in that excitatory or inhibitory responses occurred only for location of cues in a restricted portion of the visual field. Only 3 PS neurons were omnidirectional, i.e., responded equivalently to cues in all locations tested. 4. The best direction and tuning specificity of all PS neurons with directional visual responses were estimated from parameters yielding the best fit to a Gaussian-shaped tuning function. The best direction for the majority (71%) of neurons was toward the visual field contralateral to the hemisphere where the neuron was located. The remaining neurons had their best directions in the ipsilateral field (18%) or along the vertical meridian (11%). 5. The specificity of directional tuning for PS visual responses was quite variable, ranging from neurons that responded only to one of the eight cue locations to neurons that responded to all eight, but in a clearly graded fashion. The standard deviation parameter of the Gaussian curve indexed the breadth of directional tuning of each neuron; its median value was 37 degrees.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.1990.63.4.814

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Funahashi, S., Bruce, C. J., & Goldman-Rakic, P. S.
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Publisher
American Physiological Society
Published
1990-04-01
Volume
63
Issue
4
Pages
814-831
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
DOI
10.1152/jn.1990.63.4.814
OpenAlex
W1812033619
Cited by
437
References
0
FWCI
6.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.