JN Add DOIs to your references at manuscript stage!
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (December 28, 2005). doi:10.1152/jn.01016.2005
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
95/4/2638    most recent
01016.2005v1
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vladusich, T.
Right arrow Articles by Cornelissen, F. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vladusich, T.
Right arrow Articles by Cornelissen, F. W.
Submitted on September 27, 2005
Accepted on December 25, 2005

Do cortical neurons process luminance or contrast to encode surface properties?

Tony Vladusich1*, Marcel P. Lucassen2, and Frans W. Cornelissen1

1 Laboratory of Experimental Ophthalmology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands; NeuroImaging Centre, School of Behavioural and Cognitive Neurosciences, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
2 TNO Human Factors, Department of Human Interfaces, Soesterberg, The Netherlands

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: t.vladusich{at}med.umcg.nl.

Studies of human surface perception emphasise the complementary nature of contrast and luminance processing. On the one hand, contrast signals provide information about surface properties, such as reflectance, and patchy illumination conditions, such as shadows. On the other hand, processing of luminance signals may provide information about global light levels, such as the difference between sunny and cloudy days. We devised models of contrast and luminance processing, using principles of logarithmic signal coding and half-wave rectification. We fit each model to individual response profiles obtained from 67 surface-responsive macaque V1 neurons in a centre-surround paradigm similar to those used in human psychophysical studies (Kinoshita & Komatsu, 2001, Journal of Neurophysiology, 86, 2559-2570). The most general forms of the luminance and contrast models explained, on average, 73% and 87% of the response variance over the sample population, respectively. We used a statistical technique, known as Akaike's information criterion, to quantify goodness-of-fit relative to number of model parameters, giving the relative probability of each model being correct. Luminance models, having fewer parameters than contrast models, performed substantially better in the vast majority of neurons, while contrast models performed similarly well in only a small minority of neurons. These results suggest that the processing of local and mean scene luminance predominates over contrast integration in surface-responsive neurons of the primary visual cortex. The sluggish dynamics of luminance-related cortical activity may provide a neural basis for the recent psychophysical demonstration that luminance information dominates brightness perception at low temporal frequencies (Shapiro et al., 2004, Journal of Vision, 4, 459-468).




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
X. Huang and M. A. Paradiso
V1 Response Timing and Surface Filling-In
J Neurophysiol, July 1, 2008; 100(1): 539 - 547.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2005 by the The American Physiological Society.