Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29713267›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in systems neuroscience2018

Callosal Influence on Visual Receptive Fields Has an Ocular, an Orientation-and Direction Bias.

Sergio A Conde-Ocazionez, Christiane Jungen, Thomas Wunderle, David Eriksson, Sergio Neuenschwander, Kerstin E Schmidt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in systems neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Recurrent dynamics in the cerebral cortex: Integration of sensory evidence with stored knowledge.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Sergio A Conde-OcazionezBrain Institute, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Christiane JungenDepartment of Cardiology and Electrophysiology, University Heart Centre, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Thomas WunderleErnst Strüngmann Institute for Neuroscience in Cooperation with Max Planck Society, Frankfurt, Germany.
David ErikssonAlbert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Sergio NeuenschwanderBrain Institute, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Kerstin E SchmidtBrain Institute, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One leading hypothesis on the nature of visual callosal connections (CC) is that they replicate features of intrahemispheric lateral connections. However, CC act also in the central part of the binocular visual field. In agreement, early experiments in cats indicated that they provide the ipsilateral eye part of binocular receptive fields (RFs) at the vertical midline (Berlucchi and Rizzolatti, 1968), and play a key role in stereoscopic function. But until today callosal inputs to receptive fields activated by one or both eyes were never compared simultaneously, because callosal function has been often studied by cutting or lesioning either corpus callosum or optic chiasm not allowing such a comparison. To investigate the functional contribution of CC in the intact cat visual system we recorded both monocular and binocular neuronal spiking responses and receptive fields in the 17/18 transition zone during reversible deactivation of the contralateral hemisphere. Unexpectedly from many of the previous reports, we observe no change in ocular dominance during CC deactivation. Throughout the transition zone, a majority of RFs shrink, but several also increase in size. RFs are significantly more affected for ipsi- as opposed to contralateral stimulation, but changes are also observed with binocular stimulation. Noteworthy, RF shrinkages are tiny and not correlated to the profound decreases of monocular and binocular firing rates. They depend more on orientation and direction preference than on eccentricity or ocular dominance of the receiving neuron's RF. Our findings confirm that in binocularly viewing mammals, binocular RFs near the midline are constructed via the direct geniculo-cortical pathway. They also support the idea that input from the two eyes complement each other through CC: Rather than linking parts of RFs separated by the vertical meridian, CC convey a modulatory influence, reflecting the feature selectivity of lateral circuits, with a strong cardinal bias.

Indexed as

anticipationbinocularinterhemispheric connectivitymonocularorientation selectivity

Identifiers

PMID29713267
PMCPMC5911488

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.