Response properties and receptive fields of cells in an anatomically defined region of the superior temporal sulcus in the monkey
Reference (18)
The topography of the afferent projections in the circumstriate visual cortex (C.V.C.) of the monkey studied by the Nauta method
Vision Res.
(1969)Responses to visual stimuli of units in the superior colliculus of rats and monkeys
Exp. Neurol.
(1968)- et al.
Functional aspects of localization in the cat's tectum opticum
Brain Research
(1969) - et al.
Physiological studies on neural mechanisms of visual localization and discrimination
Amer. J. Ophthal.
(1941) Representation of central visual fields in prestriate cortex of monkey
Brain Research
(1969)Convergent input from the striate cortex (area 17) to the cortex of the superior temporal sulcus in the rhesus monkey
Brain Research
(1971)- et al.
Receptive fields and functional architecture in two non-striate visual areas (18 and 19) of the cat
J. Neurophysiol.
(1965) - et al.
Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex
J. Physiol. (Lond.)
(1968) - et al.
Visual area of the lateral suprasylvian gyrus (Clare-Bishop area) of the cat
J. Physiol. (Lond.)
(1969)
Cited by (439)
Dorsal visual stream activity during coherent motion processing is not related to math ability or dyscalculia
2022, NeuroImage: ClinicalCitation Excerpt :These results suggest that while portions of the IPS are involved in visual motion perception, and some may even be responsible for both visual motion processing and the representation of numbers (Renzi et al., 2011; Salillas et al., 2009; Schwiedrzik et al., 2016), any neuronal activity induced here by our coherent motion perception task is minimal and not related to mathematical ability. Area V5/MT is widely accepted as the hub of coherent visual motion processing and has been frequently studied in humans (e.g., Hampson et al., 2004; McKeefry et al., 1997; Tootell et al., 1995; Watson et al., 1993) and non-human primates (e.g., Albright, 1984; Dubner & Zeki, 1971; Maunsell & Van Essen, 1983; Ungerleider et al., 1984; see Zeki, 2015 for review). Our results indicate that area V5/MT is spared disruption in MD, and, given the bottom-up nature of the dorsal stream, one would therefore not expect anomalies in the IPS during visual motion processing, either.
The role of neural tuning in quantity perception
2022, Trends in Cognitive SciencesParallel and hierarchical neural mechanisms for adaptive and predictive behavioral control
2021, Neural NetworksCitation Excerpt :In the cortex, somatosensory signals are distributed to the secondary somatosensory cortex, parietal cortex, basal ganglia, and thalamus (Künzle, 1977; Lewis & Essen, 2000) via the primary sensory cortex, as well as being sent directly to the motor cortex via the ventrolateral nucleus of the thalamus (Iriki et al., 1991). On the other hand, visual motion signals detected by the retina, which are important for motor control, are sent to the extrastriate motion-sensitive area (MT, MST, V5) via cortical (Dubner & Zeki, 1971; Komatsu & Wurtz, 1988), subcortical (Berman & Wurtz, 2011), and direct (Schmid et al., 2010) projection pathways, from where they are then sent on towards various areas of the parietal cortex. With integrated multimodal information represented in the parietal cortex, action and motor planning emerges in the frontal, parietal, and basal ganglia networks (described in Section 2) so as to generate motor commands driving limb, eye, and body movements.
Auditory cues facilitate object movement processing in human extrastriate visual cortex during simulated self-motion: A pilot study
2021, Brain ResearchCitation Excerpt :The area hMT+, which showed the strongest crossmodal MEG effects among the visual cortex ROIs in the present study, refers to the human homolog of the combination of areas MT and MST of non-human primates. Whereas MT is densely populated by direction-selective neurons with relatively focal receptive fields (Allman and Kaas, 1971; Dubner and Zeki, 1971), the area MST includes neurons that are sensitive to larger-field optic flow effects such as those involved in the observers self-motion (Duffy and Wurtz, 1991). In their neural model, Layton and Fajen (2016) proposed that that visual flow parsing during self-motion is based on a feedback-feedforward loop that involves both MT and MST.
- *
Present address: National Institute of Dental Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md., U.S.A.