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


     


J Neurophysiol 56: 1088-1101, 1986;
0022-3077/86 $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
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Weyand, T. G.
Right arrow Articles by Schwark, H. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Weyand, T. G.
Right arrow Articles by Schwark, H. D.

Journal of Neurophysiology, Vol 56, Issue 4 1088-1101, Copyright © 1986 by APS


ARTICLES

Cat area 17. III. Response properties and orientation anisotropies of corticotectal cells

T. G. Weyand, J. G. Malpeli, C. Lee and H. D. Schwark

The receptive field properties of antidromically identified corticotectal (CT) cells in area 17 were explored in the paralyzed, anesthetized cat. To compare these with another population of infragranular cells, we also examined the receptive field properties of cells in layer 6. Sixty percent of our sample of CT cells showed increased response to increased stimulus length (length summation) and were classified as standard complex cells. The other 40% showed little or no length summation, were generally end stopped, and were classified as special complex cells. Standard and special complex CT cells have complementary orientation anisotropies: the distribution of orientation preferences of standard complex cells is biased toward obliquely oriented stimuli, whereas special complex cells are biased toward horizontally and vertically oriented stimuli. The receptive fields of the cells in our sample were primarily along the horizontal meridian so we cannot determine if these anisotropies are defined relative to the vertical meridian or relative to the meridian passing through the receptive field. The effects of these anisotropies in preferred orientation are minimized by the broad orientation tuning of CT cells. There was no simple relationship between the direction bias of CT cells and the reported direction bias of tectal cells. In contrast to the heterogeneity of corticotectal cells, layer 6 cells uniformly showed strong length summation, tight orientation tuning, and little spontaneous activity.





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