JN Track the topics, authors and articles important to you
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (December 10, 2008). doi:10.1152/jn.90963.2008
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
101/2/917    most recent
90963.2008v1
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 Web of Science
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 Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Smith, A. T
Right arrow Articles by Moutsiana, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Smith, A. T
Right arrow Articles by Moutsiana, C.
Submitted on August 26, 2008
Revised on December 8, 2008
Accepted on December 8, 2008

Dissociating vision and visual attention in the human pulvinar

Andrew T Smith1*, Philippa L Cotton1, Alona Bruno1, and Christina Moutsiana1

1 Royal Holloway, University of London

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: a.t.smith{at}rhul.ac.uk.

The pulvinar region of the thalamus has repeatedly been linked with the control of attention. However, the functions of the pulvinar remain poorly characterised, in both human and non-human primates. In a functional MRI study, we examined the relative contributions to activity in the human posterior pulvinar made by visual drive (the presence of an unattended visual stimulus) and attention (covert spatial attention to the stimulus). In an event-related design, large optic flow stimuli were presented to the left and/or right of a central fixation point. When unattended, the stimuli robustly activated two regions of the pulvinar, one medial and one dorsal with respect to the lateral geniculate (LGN). The activity in both regions shows a strong contralateral bias, suggesting retinotopic organization. Primate physiology suggests that the two regions could be two portions of the same double map of the visual field. In our paradigm, attending to the stimulus enhanced the response by about 20%. Thus, attention is not necessary in order to activate the human pulvinar and the degree of attentional enhancement matches but does not exceed that seen in the cortical regions with which the posterior pulvinar connects.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2008 by the The American Physiological Society.