ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2022
Contribution of individual features to repetition suppression in macaque inferotemporal cortex.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neuronal signatures of successful one-shot memory in mid-level visual cortex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Location-specific neural facilitation in marmoset auditory cortex.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Temporal dynamics of short-term neural adaptation across human visual cortex.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Article
- Independent repetition suppression in macaque area V2 and inferotemporal cortex.Journal of neurophysiology · 2022Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
When an image is presented twice in succession, neurons in area TE of macaque inferotemporal cortex exhibit repetition suppression, responding less strongly to the second presentation than to the first. Suppression is known to occur if the adapter and the test image are subtly different from each other. However, it is not known whether cross suppression occurs between images that are radically different from each other but that share a subset of features. To explore this issue, we measured repetition suppression using colored shapes. On interleaved trials, the test image might be identical to the adapter, might share its shape or color alone, or might differ from it totally. At the level of the neuronal population as a whole, suppression was especially deep when adapter and test were identical, intermediate when they shared only one attribute, and minimal when they shared neither attribute. At the level of the individual neuron, the degree of suppression depended not only on the properties of the two images but also on the preferences of the neuron. Suppression was deeper when the repeated color or shape was preferred by the neuron than when it was not. This effect might arise from feature-specific adaptation or alternatively from adapter-induced fatigue. Both mechanisms conform to the principle that the degree of suppression is determined by the preferences of the neuron.
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.