ArticlePLoS biology2019
Areal differences in depth cue integration between monkey and human.
Article in PLoS biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Human and artificial visual systems share a computational principle for transforming binocular disparity into depth representation.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Single-Trial fMRI Decoding of 3D Motion with Stereoscopic and Perspective Cues.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Functional Localization of Visual Motion Area FST in Humans.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Identifying cortical areas that underlie the transformation from 2D retinal to 3D head-centric motion signals.NeuroImage · 2023Article
- Common functional localizers to enhance NHP & cross-species neuroscience imaging research.NeuroImage · 2021Article
- Disparity in Context: Understanding how monocular image content interacts with disparity processing in human visual cortex.NeuroImage · 2021Article
- Rapid event-related, BOLD fMRI, non-human primates (NHP): choose two out of three.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Electrophysiological evidence suggested primarily the involvement of the middle temporal (MT) area in depth cue integration in macaques, as opposed to human imaging data pinpointing area V3B/kinetic occipital area (V3B/KO). To clarify this conundrum, we decoded monkey functional MRI (fMRI) responses evoked by stimuli signaling near or far depths defined by binocular disparity, relative motion, and their combination, and we compared results with those from an identical experiment previously performed in humans. Responses in macaque area MT are more discriminable when two cues concurrently signal depth, and information provided by one cue is diagnostic of depth indicated by the other. This suggests that monkey area MT computes fusion of disparity and motion depth signals, exactly as shown for human area V3B/KO. Hence, these data reconcile previously reported discrepancies between depth processing in human and monkey by showing the involvement of the dorsal stream in depth cue integration using the same technique, despite the engagement of different regions.
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.