Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25400550›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neural circuits2014

Method and software for using m-sequences to characterize parallel components of higher-order visual tracking behavior in Drosophila.

Jacob W Aptekar, Mehmet F Keles, Jean-Michel Mongeau, Patrick M Lu, Mark A Frye, Patrick A Shoemaker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neural circuits, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Fly eyes are not still: a motion illusion inThe Journal of experimental biology · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Visuomotor strategies for object approach and aversion inThe Journal of experimental biology · 2019
    Article
  8. Neurons forming optic glomeruli compute figure-ground discriminations in Drosophila.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2015
    Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors.

Jacob W AptekarDepartment of Integrative Biology and Physiology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Mehmet F KelesDepartment of Integrative Biology and Physiology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Jean-Michel MongeauDepartment of Integrative Biology and Physiology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Patrick M LuDepartment of Integrative Biology and Physiology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Mark A FryeDepartment of Integrative Biology and Physiology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Patrick A ShoemakerTanner Research Inc. Monrovia, CA, USA.

Funding

UCLA-Caltech Medical Scientist Training ProgramT32GM008042 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI AJIJOLA, OLUJIMI A, DAWSON, DAVID WAYNE · 1985 to 2023
$29.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM008042
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A moving visual figure may contain first-order signals defined by variation in mean luminance, as well as second-order signals defined by constant mean luminance and variation in luminance envelope, or higher-order signals that cannot be estimated by taking higher moments of the luminance distribution. Separating these properties of a moving figure to experimentally probe the visual subsystems that encode them is technically challenging and has resulted in debated mechanisms of visual object detection by flies. Our prior work took a white noise systems identification approach using a commercially available electronic display system to characterize the spatial variation in the temporal dynamics of two distinct subsystems for first- and higher-order components of visual figure tracking. The method relied on the use of single pixel displacements of two visual stimuli according to two binary maximum length shift register sequences (m-sequences) and cross-correlation of each m-sequence with time-varying flight steering measurements. The resultant spatio-temporal action fields represent temporal impulse responses parameterized by the azimuthal location of the visual figure, one STAF for first-order and another for higher-order components of compound stimuli. Here we review m-sequence and reverse correlation procedures, then describe our application in detail, provide Matlab code, validate the STAFs, and demonstrate the utility and robustness of STAFs by predicting the results of other published experimental procedures. This method has demonstrated how two relatively modest innovations on classical white noise analysis--the inclusion of space as a way to organize response kernels and the use of linear decoupling to measure the response to two channels of visual information simultaneously--could substantially improve our basic understanding of visual processing in the fly.

Indexed as

SoftwareAnalysis of VarianceAnimalsDrosophilaModels, BiologicalMotion PerceptionPhotic StimulationReproducibility of ResultsVision, OcularVisual FieldsVisual PathwaysattentionDrosophiladynamicsfixationoptomotorpsychophysicssystem identificationvision

Identifiers

PMID25400550
PMCPMC4215624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.