JN Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol 47: 869-884, 1982;
0022-3077/82 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sur, M.
Right arrow Articles by Sherman, S. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sur, M.
Right arrow Articles by Sherman, S. M.

Journal of Neurophysiology, Vol 47, Issue 5 869-884, Copyright © 1982 by APS


ARTICLES

Linear and nonlinear W-cells in C-laminae of the cat's lateral geniculate nucleus

M. Sur and S. M. Sherman

1. We used standard, single-cell recording techniques to study the response properties of 34 W-cells in the C-laminae of the cat's lateral geniculate nucleus. By W-cell, we mean a poorly responsive geniculate neuron that receives slowly conducting retinal afferents; these are quite distinct from geniculate X- and Y-cells. Our measurements included response latency to optic chiasm stimulation, plots of the receptive-field center, time course of response, and responses to counterphased, sine-wave gratings. This last measurement also involved the determination of contrast sensitivity, which is defined as the inverse of the contrast needed to evoke a threshold response at a particular spatial and temporal frequency of the grating. Many of these responses were compared to those of geniculate X- and Y-cells recorded in the A-laminae. 2. Each of the W-cells responded with a latency of at least 2.0 ms to optic chiasm stimulation, and most (76%) exhibited a latency of at least 2.5 ms. However, only 26 of these W-cells responded to visual stimuli, and these responses were weak or "sluggish," as has been reported previously. Receptive fields of these W-cells tended to be large, compared to those of X- and Y-cells, and included 11 on-center, 13 off-center, and 2 on-off center fields. 3. W-cells exhibited either linear (12 cells) or nonlinear (14 cells) spatial and temporal summation, as determined from their responses to counterphased, sine-wave gratings. Linearity of spatial summation was determined by measuring contrast sensitivity as a function of the grating's spatial phase. The linear W-cells' responses were sinusoidally phase dependent, and the nonlinear W-cells' responses were independent of spatial phase. Linearity of temporal summation was determined by the presence or absence of harmonic distortion in the response relative to the grating's counterphase rate. Linear W-cells responded chiefly at the grating's fundamental temporal frequency, whereas much of the nonlinear W-cells' responses occurred at the second harmonic of the grating's temporal frequency. Thus, nonlinear W-cells exhibited many of the characteristics previously described for Y-cells. 4. Spatial and temporal contrast-sensitivity functions were determined for seven linear and eight nonlinear W-cells. Overall sensitivity values of the linear and nonlinear W-cells were comparable, but these groups differed in terms of the nature of the response component (linear or nonlinear) that was more sensitive. 5. The linear W-cells in our sample included both tonic (comparable to the "sluggish-transient" type of retinal ganglion cells) types, while all nonlinear W-cells were phasic. Otherwise, no difference between linear and nonlinear W-cells was seen for latency to optic chiasm stimulation, receptive-field size, overall contrast sensitivity, responsiveness to visual stimuli, overall spatial resolution, or temporal resolution. 6...


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
K. A. Schneider and S. Kastner
Visual Responses of the Human Superior Colliculus: A High-Resolution Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study
J Neurophysiol, October 1, 2005; 94(4): 2491 - 2503.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
C. Weng, C.-I Yeh, C. R. Stoelzel, and J.-M. Alonso
Receptive Field Size and Response Latency Are Correlated Within the Cat Visual Thalamus
J Neurophysiol, June 1, 2005; 93(6): 3537 - 3547.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurosci.Home page
Y. Zhu and J. J. Zhu
Rapid Arrival and Integration of Ascending Sensory Information in Layer 1 Nonpyramidal Neurons and Tuft Dendrites of Layer 5 Pyramidal Neurons of the Neocortex
J. Neurosci., February 11, 2004; 24(6): 1272 - 1279.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
M. S. Grubb and I. D. Thompson
Quantitative Characterization of Visual Response Properties in the Mouse Dorsal Lateral Geniculate Nucleus
J Neurophysiol, December 1, 2003; 90(6): 3594 - 3607.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
C.-I Yeh, C. R. Stoelzel, and J.-M. Alonso
Two Different Types of Y Cells in the Cat Lateral Geniculate Nucleus
J Neurophysiol, September 1, 2003; 90(3): 1852 - 1864.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
IOVSHome page
A. J. R. White, H. Sun, W. H. Swanson, and B. B. Lee
An Examination of Physiological Mechanisms Underlying the Frequency-Doubling Illusion
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., November 1, 2002; 43(11): 3590 - 3599.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ScienceHome page
M Sur, P. Garraghty, and A. Roe
Experimentally induced visual projections into auditory thalamus and cortex
Science, December 9, 1988; 242(4884): 1437 - 1441.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online