ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Modeling circuit mechanisms of opposing cortical responses to visual flow perturbations.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep-learning-assisted simulation of a cortical circuit: integrating anatomy, physiology and function.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Correction: Modeling circuit mechanisms of opposing cortical responses to visual flow perturbations.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Large-Scale Mechanistic Models of Brain Circuits with Biophysically and Morphologically Detailed Neurons.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In an ever-changing visual world, animals' survival depends on their ability to perceive and respond to rapidly changing motion cues. The primary visual cortex (V1) is at the forefront of this sensory processing, orchestrating neural responses to perturbations in visual flow. However, the underlying neural mechanisms that lead to distinct cortical responses to such perturbations remain enigmatic. In this study, our objective was to uncover the neural dynamics that govern V1 neurons' responses to visual flow perturbations using a biologically realistic computational model. By subjecting the model to sudden changes in visual input, we observed opposing cortical responses in excitatory layer 2/3 (L2/3) neurons, namely, depolarizing and hyperpolarizing responses. We found that this segregation was primarily driven by the competition between external visual input and recurrent inhibition, particularly within L2/3 and L4. This division was not observed in excitatory L5/6 neurons, suggesting a more prominent role for inhibitory mechanisms in the visual processing of the upper cortical layers. Our findings share similarities with recent experimental studies focusing on the opposing influence of top-down and bottom-up inputs in the mouse primary visual cortex during visual flow perturbations.
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.