Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20660427›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2010

Representation of the ipsilateral visual field by neurons in the macaque lateral intraparietal cortex depends on the forebrain commissures.

Catherine A Dunn, Carol L Colby

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Excitatory synaptic feedback from the motor layer to the sensory layers of the superior colliculus.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2014
    Article
  5. Article
  6. A novel, variable angle guide grid for neuronal activity studies.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2011
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Catherine A DunnDepartment of Neuroscience and Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Carol L Colby
Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition · US

Funding

THE ROLE OF PREFRONTAL CORTEX IN THE COGNITIVE DYSFUNCTIONS OF SCHIZOPHRENIAP50MH045156 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI SAMPSON, ALLAN R · 1990 to 2007
$17.9M
ULTRA FAST IMAGING TECHNIQUESP41RR003631 · NCRR · MELLON PITTS CORPORATION (MPC CORP) · PI HO, CHIEN · 1988 to 2002
$2.7M
ACTIVE VISION IN PRIMATE CORTEXR01EY012032 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI COLBY, CAROL L · 1998 to 2008
$2.3M
NCRR NIH HHS P41-RR-03631NEI NIH HHS EY-08908NEI NIH HHS EY-12032NEI NIH HHS R01 EY012032NIMH NIH HHS MH-45156NIMH NIH HHS P50 MH045156
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Our eyes are constantly moving, allowing us to attend to different visual objects in the environment. With each eye movement, a given object activates an entirely new set of visual neurons, yet we perceive a stable scene. One neural mechanism that may contribute to visual stability is remapping. Neurons in several brain regions respond to visual stimuli presented outside the receptive field when an eye movement brings the stimulated location into the receptive field. The stored representation of a visual stimulus is remapped, or updated, in conjunction with the saccade. Remapping depends on neurons being able to receive visual information from outside the classic receptive field. In previous studies, we asked whether remapping across hemifields depends on the forebrain commissures. We found that, when the forebrain commissures are transected, behavior dependent on accurate spatial updating is initially impaired but recovers over time. Moreover, neurons in lateral intraparietal cortex (LIP) continue to remap information across hemifields in the absence of the forebrain commissures. One possible explanation for the preserved across-hemifield remapping in split-brain animals is that neurons in a single hemisphere could represent visual information from both visual fields. In the present study, we measured receptive fields of LIP neurons in split-brain monkeys and compared them with receptive fields in intact monkeys. We found a small number of neurons with bilateral receptive fields in the intact monkeys. In contrast, we found no such neurons in the split-brain animals. We conclude that bilateral representations in area LIP following forebrain commissures transection cannot account for remapping across hemifields.

Indexed as

AnimalsCorpus CallosumElectrophysiologyEye MovementsMacaca mulattaNeuronsParietal LobePhotic StimulationProsencephalonSplit-Brain ProcedureVisual Fields

Identifiers

PMID20660427
PMCPMC2997031
OpenAlexW1964775445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.