HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 96/1/404    most recent 00015.2005v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (10) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Teich, A. F. Articles by Qian, N. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Teich, A. F. Articles by Qian, N.

Comparison Among Some Models of Orientation Selectivity

Center for Neurobiology and Behavior, Mahoney Center for Brain and Behavior Research, and Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics, Columbia University, New York, New York

Submitted 7 January 2005; accepted in final form 14 April 2006

Several models exist for explaining primary visual cortex (V1) orientation tuning. The modified feedforward model (MFM) and the recurrent model (RM) are major examples. We have implemented these two models, at the same level of detail, alongside a few newer variations, and thoroughly compared their receptive-field structures. We found that antiphase inhibition in the MFM enhances both spatial phase information and orientation tuning, producing well-tuned simple cells. This remains true for a newer version of the MFM that incorporates untuned complex-cell inhibition. In contrast, when the recurrent connections in the RM are strong enough to produce typical V1 orientation tuning, they also eliminate spatial phase information, making the cells complex. Introducing phase specificity into the connections of the RM (as done in an original version of the RM) can make the cells phase sensitive, but the cells show an incorrect 90° peak shift of orientation tuning under opposite contrast signs. An inhibition-dominant version of the RM can generate well-tuned cells across the simple–complex spectrum, but it predicts that the net effect of cortical interactions is to suppress feedforward excitation across all orientations in simple cells. Finally, adding antiphase inhibition used in the MFM into the RM produces a most general model. We call this new model the modified recurrent model (MRM) and show that this model can also produce well-tuned cells throughout the simple–complex spectrum. Unlike the inhibition-dominant RM, the MRM is consistent with data from cat V1, suggesting that the net effect of cortical interactions is to boost simple cell responses at the preferred orientation. These results suggest that the MFM is well suited for explaining orientation tuning in simple cells, whereas the standard RM is for complex cells. The assignment of the RM to complex cells also avoids conflicts between the RM and the experiments of cortical inactivation (done on simple cells) and the spatial-frequency dependency of orientation tuning (found in simple cells). Because orientation-tuned V1 cells show a continuum of simple- to complex-cell behavior, the MRM provides the best description of V1 data.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Stimberg, K. Wimmer, R. Martin, L. Schwabe, J. Marino, J. Schummers, D. C. Lyon, M. Sur, and K. Obermayer The Operating Regime of Local Computations in Primary Visual Cortex Cereb Cortex, September 1, 2009; 19(9): 2166 - 2180. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. de Almeida, M. Idiart, and J. E. Lisman A Second Function of Gamma Frequency Oscillations: An E%-Max Winner-Take-All Mechanism Selects Which Cells Fire J. Neurosci., June 10, 2009; 29(23): 7497 - 7503. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Diester and A. Nieder Complementary Contributions of Prefrontal Neuron Classes in Abstract Numerical Categorization J. Neurosci., July 30, 2008; 28(31): 7737 - 7747. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. G. Nowak, M. V. Sanchez-Vives, and D. A. McCormick Lack of Orientation and Direction Selectivity in a Subgroup of Fast-Spiking Inhibitory Interneurons: Cellular and Synaptic Mechanisms and Comparison with Other Electrophysiological Cell Types Cereb Cortex, May 1, 2008; 18(5): 1058 - 1078. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Banitt, K. A. C. Martin, and I. Segev A Biologically Realistic Model of Contrast Invariant Orientation Tuning by Thalamocortical Synaptic Depression J. Neurosci., September 19, 2007; 27(38): 10230 - 10239. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Sohya, K. Kameyama, Y. Yanagawa, K. Obata, and T. Tsumoto GABAergic Neurons Are Less Selective to Stimulus Orientation than Excitatory Neurons in Layer II/III of Visual Cortex, as Revealed by In Vivo Functional Ca2+ Imaging in Transgenic Mice J. Neurosci., February 21, 2007; 27(8): 2145 - 2149. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]