ArticleScientific reports2026
Distinct inhibitory connectivity motifs could trigger distinct forms of anticipation in the retinal network.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Motion is an important feature of visual scenes and retinal neuronal circuits selectively signal different motion features. It has been shown that the retina can extrapolate the position of a moving object, thereby compensating sensory transmission delays and enabling signal processing in real-time. Amacrine cells, the inhibitory interneurons of the retina, play essential roles in such computations although their precise function remain unclear. Here, we computationally explore the potential effects of two different inhibitory connectivity motifs on the retina's response to moving objects, in a simplified model of the retina: feed-forward and recurrent feed-back inhibition. In this model, both motifs can account for motion anticipation with two different mechanisms. Feed-forward inhibition truncates motion responses and shifts peak responses forward via subtractive inhibition, whereas recurrent feed-back coupling evokes excitatory and inhibitory waves with different phases that interfere and shift the response peak. A key difference between the two mechanisms is how the anticipatory peak shift scales with the speed of a moving object. Motion prediction with feed-forward circuits monotonically decreases with increasing speeds, while recurrent feed-back coupling induces tuning curves that exhibit a preferred speed for which motion prediction is maximal.
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.