Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31622471›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2019

Temporal dynamics of binocular integration in primary visual cortex.

Michele A Cox, Kacie Dougherty, Jacob A Westerberg, Michelle S Schall, Alexander Maier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

5 authors.

Michele A CoxDepartment of Psychology, College of Arts and Science, Vanderbilt Vision Research Center, Center for Cognitive and Integrative Neuroscience, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Kacie DoughertyDepartment of Psychology, College of Arts and Science, Vanderbilt Vision Research Center, Center for Cognitive and Integrative Neuroscience, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Jacob A WesterbergDepartment of Psychology, College of Arts and Science, Vanderbilt Vision Research Center, Center for Cognitive and Integrative Neuroscience, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Michelle S SchallDepartment of Psychology, College of Arts and Science, Vanderbilt Vision Research Center, Center for Cognitive and Integrative Neuroscience, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Alexander MaierDepartment of Psychology, College of Arts and Science, Vanderbilt Vision Research Center, Center for Cognitive and Integrative Neuroscience, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.

Funding

Shop Module CoreP30EY008126 · NEI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI Kevin L Schey · 1989 to 2026
$19.6M
Training in Vision ResearchT32EY007135 · NEI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI GEOFFREY F WOODMAN · 1994 to 2026
$5.8M
Binocular integration in the primate lateral geniculate nucleusR01EY027402 · NEI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI MAIER, ALEXANDER VINZENZ · 2017 to 2021
$1.9M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY008126NEI NIH HHS R01 EY027402NEI NIH HHS T32 EY007135
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whenever we open our eyes, our brain quickly integrates the two eyes' perspectives into a combined view. This process of binocular integration happens so rapidly that even incompatible stimuli are briefly fused before one eye's view is suppressed in favor of the other (binocular rivalry). The neuronal basis for this brief period of fusion during incompatible binocular stimulation is unclear. Neuroanatomically, the eyes provide two largely separate streams of information that are integrated into a binocular response by the primary visual cortex (V1). However, the temporal dynamics underlying the formation of this binocular response are largely unknown. To address this question, we examined the temporal profile of binocular responses in V1 of fixating monkeys. We found that V1 processes binocular stimuli in a dynamic sequence that comprises at least two distinct temporal phases. An initial transient phase is characterized by enhanced spiking responses for both compatible and incompatible binocular stimuli compared to monocular stimulation. This transient is followed by a sustained response that differed markedly between congruent and incongruent binocular stimulation. Specifically, incompatible binocular stimulation resulted in overall response reduction relative to monocular stimulation (binocular suppression). In contrast, responses to compatible stimuli were either suppressed or enhanced (binocular facilitation) depending on the neurons' ocularity (selectivity for one eye over the other) and laminar location. These results suggest that binocular integration in V1 occurs in at least two sequential steps that comprise initial additive combination of the two eyes' signals followed by widespread differentiation between binocular concordance and discordance.

Indexed as

Ocular Physiological PhenomenaVision, BinocularAnimalsBehavior, AnimalFemaleMacaca radiataMaleNeuronsNeurophysiologyPhotic StimulationReproducibility of ResultsTime FactorsVisual Cortex

Identifiers

PMID31622471
PMCPMC6797477

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.