ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2010
Representation of the ipsilateral visual field by neurons in the macaque lateral intraparietal cortex depends on the forebrain commissures.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- How forward remapping predicts peri-saccadic biphasic mislocalization.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Dynamic shifts of visual and saccadic signals in prefrontal cortical regions 8Ar and FEF.Journal of neurophysiology · 2020Article
- Circuits for Action and Cognition: A View from the Superior Colliculus.Annual review of vision science · 2017Review
- 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 · 2014Article
- Shape selectivity and remapping in dorsal stream visual area LIP.Journal of neurophysiology · 2014Article
- A novel, variable angle guide grid for neuronal activity studies.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.