The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sensitivity of MST neurons to optic flow stimuli. II. Mechanisms of response selectivity revealed by small-field stimuli
Abstract
1. In these experiments we examined the receptive field mechanisms that support the optic flow field selective responses of neurons in the dorsomedial region of the medial superior temporal area (MSTd). Our experiments tested the predictions of two hypotheses of optic flow field selectivity. The direction mosaic hypothesis states that these receptive fields contain a set of planar direction-selective subfields that match the local directions of motion within optic flow fields. The vector field hypothesis states that these receptive fields are uniquely sensitive to distributed properties of planar, circular, or radial optic flow fields. 2. Experiments using large-field stimuli revealed that some neurons showed changes in optic flow field selectivity depending on the position of the stimulus in the receptive field; these are position-dependent responses. However, other neurons maintained the same optic flow field selectivities in spite of changes in stimulus position; these are position-invariant responses. We have used the position dependence or invariance of optic flow field selectivity as a way of testing the direction mosaic and vector field hypotheses. Position dependence is more consistent with the direction mosaic hypothesis, whereas position invariance is more consistent with the vector field hypothesis. 3. To test for position effects, we examined the optic flow field selectivity of small subfields within the large receptive fields of 160 MSTd neurons. First, we centered small-field optic flow stimuli of various sizes over the same position in the receptive field. Most MSTd neurons showed decreasing response amplitude with decreasing stimulus size but maintained optic flow field selectivity. 4. We then placed small-field stimuli at various positions within the large receptive field of these MSTd neurons. Position-invariant response selectivity was most prominent in single-component neurons, suggesting that they were more consistent with the vector field hypothesis. Position-dependent response selectivity was most prominent in triple-component neurons, suggesting that they were more consistent with the direction mosaic hypothesis. However, the variations in planar direction preference throughout the receptive field of these triple-component neurons were not consistent with a direction mosaic explanation of the large-field circular or radial selectivity observed. 5. Small-field position studies also demonstrated the existence of zones within the receptive field in which either direction-selective inhibitory or direction-selective excitatory responses predominated. The degree of overlap between these zones increased from nonselective to triple- to double- and finally to single-component neurons.(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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Duffy, C. J., & Wurtz, R. H. (1991) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.1991.65.6.1329 · Cited by 879
Self-citationModel for the extraction of image flow
Heeger, D. J. (1987) · Journal of the Optical Society of America A · doi:10.1364/josaa.4.001455 · Cited by 574
Tanaka, K., Fukada, Y., & Saito, H. A. (1989) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.1989.62.3.642 · Cited by 358
Motter, B., & Mountcastle, V. (1981) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.01-01-00003.1981 · Cited by 350
Cited by
Modeling visual attention via selective tuning
Tsotsos, J. K., Culhane, S. M., Kei Wai, W. Y., Lai, Y., Davis, N., & Nuflo, F. (1995) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/0004-3702(95)00025-9 · Cited by 1,143
Murata, A., Gallese, V., Luppino, G., Kaseda, M., & Sakata, H. (2000) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.2000.83.5.2580 · Cited by 841
Neural mechanisms of form and motion processing in the primate visual system
Van Essen, D. C., & Gallant, J. L. (1994) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/0896-6273(94)90455-3 · Cited by 606
Perception of self-motion from visual flow
Lappe, M., Bremmer, F., & van den Berg, A. V. (1999) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(99)01364-9 · Cited by 430
Deep Hierarchies in the Primate Visual Cortex: What Can We Learn for Computer Vision?
Kruger, N., Janssen, P., Kalkan, S., Lappe, M., Leonardis, A., Piater, J., Rodriguez-Sanchez, A. J., & Wiskott, L. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2012.272 · Cited by 362
Metadata
- Authors
- Duffy, C. J., & Wurtz, R. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Neurophysiology
- Publisher
- American Physiological Society
- Published
- 1991-06-01
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1346-1359
- ISSN
- 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-1598
- OpenAlex
- W2336245836
- Cited by
- 371
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 3.85
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sensitivity of MST neurons to optic flow stimuli. II. Mechanisms of response selectivity revealed by small-field stimuli. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1152/jn.1991.65.6.1346
- The paper
- Duffy, C. J., & Wurtz, R. H. (1991). Sensitivity of MST neurons to optic flow stimuli. II. Mechanisms of response selectivity revealed by small-field stimuli. Journal of Neurophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1991.65.6.1346
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.