Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41193256›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2026

Orientation Maps in Mouse Superior Colliculus Explained by Population Model of Non-Orientation Selective Neurons.

Austin Kuo, Justin L Gardner, Elisha P Merriam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Austin KuoLaboratory of Brain and Cognition, NIMH, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 achkuo@stanford.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-1819-0063
Justin L GardnerWu Tsai Neurosciences Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305.ORCID 0000-0003-2220-5050
Elisha P MerriamLaboratory of Brain and Cognition, NIMH, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland 20892.ORCID 0000-0003-2787-566X

Funding

Training Program in Basic NeuroscienceT32MH020016 · NIMH · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Justin L Gardner, Merritt C Maduke · 1997 to 2026
$16.2M
Multiple Scales of Stimulus Representation in the Human BrainZIAMH002966 · NIMH · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH · PI MERRIAM, ELISHA · 2017 to 2025
$10.5M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA MH002966NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH020016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mouse superficial superior colliculus (sSC) has been found to have orientation selective maps, suggesting a fundamentally different selectivity than in primate SC. Moreover, orientation selectivity in mouse sSC appears to change with stimulus properties such as size, shape, and spatial frequency, in contradistinction to the computational principle of invariance in primates. To reconcile mouse and primate mechanisms for orientation selectivity, we constructed a computational model of mouse sSC populations with circular-symmetric, center-surround (i.e., not intrinsically orientation selective), stimulus-invariant receptive fields (RFs), classically used to describe monkey lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) neurons. This model produced population maps similar to those found in mouse sSC, which show strong radial orientation preferences at retinotopic locations along stimulus edges. We show how this selectivity depended critically on spatial frequency tuning of the model units. The model predicted a shift from radial to anti-radial orientation preferences from the same simulated units at high stimulus spatial frequencies, also consistent with measurements from mouse sSC. We found intrinsically oriented RFs were largely unnecessary to explain the imaging data but could explain a possible small subpopulation of intrinsically orientation selective neurons. We conclude that to study orientation selectivity in mouse sSC and other systems, the problem is not the choice of stimulus. Rather than endless tweaks to find the perfect, unbiased stimulus, image-computable population modeling is the solution. Regardless of the stimulus presented, comparing how well models of intrinsically or non-intrinsically orientation selective units account for empirical data provides definitive evidence for underlying neural selectivity.

Indexed as

Brain MappingModels, NeurologicalNeuronsOrientationOrientation, SpatialSuperior ColliculiAnimalsComputer SimulationMicePhotic StimulationVisual FieldsVisual Pathwayscomputational modelingneural populationsorientationspatial frequencysuperior colliculusvisual neuroscience

Identifiers

PMID41193256
PMCPMC12809627

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.