Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 504

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Magnocellular and parvocellular contributions to responses in the middle temporal visual area (MT) of the macaque monkey

Open access
Maunsell, JH, Nealey, TA, DePriest, DD·1990·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Many lines of evidence suggest that the visual signals relayed through the magnocellular and parvocellular subdivisions of the primate dorsal LGN remain largely segregated through several levels of cortical processing. It has been suggested that this segregation persists through to the highest stages of the visual cortex, and that the pronounced differences between the neuronal response properties in the parietal cortex and inferotemporal cortex may be attributed to differential contributions from magnocellular and parvocellular signals. We have examined this hypothesis directly by recording the responses of cortical neurons while selectively blocking responses in the magnocellular or parvocellular layers of the LGN. Responses were recorded from single units or multiunit clusters in the middle temporal visual area (MT), which is part of the pathway leading to parietal cortex and thought to receive primarily magnocellular inputs. Responses in the MT were consistently reduced when the magnocellular subdivision of the LGN was inactivated. The reduction was almost always pronounced and often complete. In contrast, parvocellular block rarely produced striking changes in MT responses and typically had very little effect. Nevertheless, unequivocal parvocellular contributions could be demonstrated for a minority of MT responses. At a few MT sites, responses were recorded while magnocellular and parvocellular blocks were made simultaneously. Responses were essentially eliminated for all these paired blocks. These results provide direct evidence for segregation of magnocellular and parvocellular contributions in the extrastriate visual cortex and support the suggestion that these signals remain largely segregated through the highest levels of cortical processing.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.10-10-03323.1990

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

  • Object vision and spatial vision: Two cortical pathways

    Mishkin, M., Ungerleider, L. G., & Macko, K. A. (1983) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/0166-2236(83)90190-x · Cited by 2,947 · cited 2×

    “includes much of the parietal cortex, and a color and form pathway, which includes most of the inferotemporal cortex (see Ungerleider and Mishkin, 1982; Mishkin et al., 1983; Van Essen and Maunsell, 1983; Van Essen, 1985; Maunsell and Newsome, 1987).”

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 504

Metadata

Authors
Maunsell, J., Nealey, T., & DePriest, D.
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
1990-10-01
Volume
10
Issue
10
Pages
3323-3334
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W1891465257
Cited by
504
References
1
FWCI
7.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Magnocellular and parvocellular contributions to responses in the middle temporal visual area (MT) of the macaque monkey. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1523/jneurosci.10-10-03323.1990
The paper
Maunsell, J., Nealey, T., & DePriest, D. (1990). Magnocellular and parvocellular contributions to responses in the middle temporal visual area (MT) of the macaque monkey. The Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.10-10-03323.1990

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.