Cited by 307Neural dynamics and brain functionVisual perception and processing mechanismsMultisensory perception and integration

Oscillatory neuronal synchronization in primary visual cortex as a correlate of stimulus selection

Open access
Fries, Pascal, Schröder, Jan-Hinrich, Roelfsema, Pieter R., Singer, Wolf, Engel, Andreas K.·2002·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Spike and local field potential activity were recorded simultaneously from multiple sites in primary visual cortex of strabismic cats, while monocular stimulation alternated with dichoptic stimulation, inducing interocular rivalry. During interocular rivalry, there is competition between the two nonfusible stimuli presented to the two eyes, and only one stimulus is selected at any time. We biased this competition in three different ways: (1) we exploited the condition that in strabismic cats there is often one dominant eye that is selected for most of the time. (2) We presented the two stimuli with a temporal offset, which biases competition in favor of the newly appearing stimulus. (3) We presented the two stimuli with highly different contrasts, which biases competition in favor of the stimulus with higher contrast. Whenever competition was biased in favor of the stimulus activating the recorded neurons, gamma-frequency synchronization of the respective responses was enhanced, and vice versa. Firing rates showed some differences between stimulation conditions. However, when present, these changes were inversely related to a competitive advantage of the respective stimulus. We hypothesize that enhanced gamma-frequency synchronization in primary visual cortex is a correlate of stimulus selection. Synchronization is likely to be translated into firing rate changes at later processing stages.

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.22-09-03739.2002

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Neuronal membrane polarization states may be precisely synchronized over large regions of brain, and also propagate through brain regions as synchronized zones.

    “Neuronal membrane polarization states may be precisely synchronized over large regions of brain [21], and also propagate through brain regions as synchronized zones [22].”

    From Consciousness in the universe (2014) · cites this paper as [21]

    The citation to this paper is attached to the first clause, not the claim about propagation. The Discussion reports precise spike synchronization and says local field potentials reflect synchronized transmembrane currents in neuronal populations. But the recordings were from primary visual cortex in cats; they do not establish synchronization of membrane polarization states over large regions of the brain. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 48 · Cited by 307

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Press WH, Flannery BP, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT (1992) Numer- ical recipes in C. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  2. von Noorden GK (1990) Theory and management of strabismus. St. Louis, MO: C. V. Mosby.

Authors
Fries, P., Schröder, J.-H., Roelfsema, P. R., Singer, W., & Engel, A. K.
Affiliations
  • Donders Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging (NL)
  • Max Planck Institute for Brain Research (DE)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Forschungszentrum Jülich (DE)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2002-05-01
Volume
22
Issue
9
Pages
3739-3754
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2143062588
Cited by
307
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 17
FWCI
7.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • JuSER (Forschungszentrum Jülich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  • Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
Keywords
neuronal synchronization, gamma oscillations, primary visual cortex, stimulus selection, strabismus, dichoptic stimulation, monocular stimulation, dominant eye, temporal offset, contrast, spike synchronization, local field potentials, firing rate
MeSH terms
Action Potentials, Animals, Biological Clocks, Cats, Convergence, Ocular, Electrooculography, Eye Movements, Neurons, Photic Stimulation, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Strabismus, Visual Cortex, Wakefulness, Contrast Sensitivity, Dominance, Ocular

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