Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,415

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Functional analysis of human MT and related visual cortical areas using magnetic resonance imaging

Open access
Tootell, RB, Reppas, JB, Kwong, KK, Malach, R, Born, RT, Brady, TJ, Rosen, BR, Belliveau, JW·1995·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Using noninvasive functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) technique, we analyzed the responses in human area MT with regard to visual motion, color, and luminance contrast sensitivity, and retinotopy. As in previous PET studies, we found that area MT responded selectively to moving (compared to stationary) stimuli. The location of human MT in the present fMRI results is consistent with that of MT in earlier PET and anatomical studies. In addition we found that area MT has a much higher contrast sensitivity than that in several other areas, including primary visual cortex (V1). Functional MRI half- amplitudes in V1 and MT occurred at approximately 15% and 1% luminance contrast, respectively. High sensitivity to contrast and motion in MT have been closely associated with magnocellular stream specialization in nonhuman primates. Human psychophysics indicates that visual motion appears to diminish when moving color-varying stimuli are equated in luminance. Electrophysiological results from macaque MT suggest that the human percept could be due to decreases in firing of area MT cells at equiluminance. We show here that fMRI activity in human MT does in fact decrease at and near individually measured equiluminance. Tests with visuotopically restricted stimuli in each hemifield produced spatial variations in fMRI activity consistent with retinotopy in human homologs of macaque areas V1, V2, V3, and VP. Such activity in area MT appeared much less retinotopic, as in macaque. However, it was possible to measure the interhemispheric spread of fMRI activity in human MT (half amplitude activation across the vertical meridian = approximately 15 degrees).

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.15-04-03215.1995

Cites

9 of 9 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

Cited by

See all 1,415

Metadata

Authors
Tootell, R., Reppas, J., Kwong, K., Malach, R., Born, R., Brady, T., Rosen, B., & Belliveau, J.
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
1995-04-01
Volume
15
Issue
4
Pages
3215-3230
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W1519349329
Cited by
1,415
References
9
FWCI
30.92
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

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.