scholarly journals Visual Receptive Field Properties of Neurons in the Mouse Lateral Geniculate Nucleus

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e0146017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiaying Tang ◽  
Silvia C. Ardila Jimenez ◽  
Subhojit Chakraborty ◽  
Simon R. Schultz
1977 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 390-409 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. D. Spear ◽  
D. C. Smith ◽  
L. L. Williams

1. Visual receptive-field characteristics were determined for 154 cells in the ventral lateral geniculate nucleus (VLG) of cats anesthetized with nitrous oxide. All cells were verified histologically to be within the VLG. Responses of 182 cells from laminae A and A1 of the dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (DLG) were tested for comparison. 2. The VLG cells could be grouped into one of seven classes according to their responses to light stimulation. Twenty-seven percent of the cells had uniform receptive fields. They responded maximally to stationary stimuli flashed on or off anywhere within the receptive field and showed no evidence for antagonistic surround mechanisms. About 19.5% of the VLG cells had concentric receptive fields. They were similar to the uniform type, with the addition of a concentric inhibitory surround. Eight percent of the VLG cells had ambient receptive fields. These cells were characterized by an unusually regular maintained discharge which varied in rate in relation to the level of receptive-field illumination or of full-field ambient illumination. About 4% of the VLG cells were movement sensitive. They gave little or no response to stationary stimuli flashed on or off in the receptive field, and responded best to a contour moving across the receptive field in any direction. An additional 2.5% of the VLG cells were direction sensitive. Their response was dependent on the direction of stimulus movement through the receptive field. Sixteen percent of the VLG cells had indefinite receptive fields. They responded to whole-eye illumination or to localized visual-field stimulation; however, specific receptive-field properties could not be adequately defined. Approximately 23% of the VLG cells studied gave no convincing response to visual stimulation. 3. Responses of DLG cells agreed with those reported in previous studies. Almost all (97%) had concentric receptive fields, and a few (3%) had uniform receptive fields with no apparent antagonistic surround. None of the DLG cells had receptive fields like those in the other classes found for VLG cells. 4. The VLG cells tended to have large receptive fields; mean diameter was 10.6 degrees of visual arc. This was substantially larger than the diameter of receptive fields for DLG cells. In addition, VLG cells generally required larger stimuli than DLG cells to respond. There was no consistent relationship between receptive-field size and visual-field eccentricity for VLG cells, in contrast to the DLG. Most (57%) VLG cells were driven only by the contralateral eye, 30% were binocularly driven, and 13% were driven only by the ipsilateral eye. 5. A systematic visuotopic organization was present in the VLG. The lower visual field was represented anteriorly in the nucleus and the upper visual field posteriorly. The vertical meridian was represented along the dorsomedial border of the VLG where it abuts the DLG, and the temporal periphery was represented ventrolaterally. 6. Responses to electrical stimulation of the optic chiasm were studied for 55 VLG cells...


2013 ◽  
Vol 33 (28) ◽  
pp. 11494-11505 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. D. Van Hooser ◽  
A. Roy ◽  
H. J. Rhodes ◽  
J. H. Culp ◽  
D. Fitzpatrick

1987 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 357-380 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. N. Mastronarde

Cells in the cat's dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) were studied by presentation of visual stimuli and also by simultaneous recording of their ganglion cell inputs in the retina. This paper describes receptive-field properties and a new system of classification for LGN X-cells that appear to receive essentially only one excitatory retinal input. These X-cells were of two distinct classes. The visual responses of one class of cell (XS, single) replicated the basic form of the responses of a retinal X-cell. The other class of cell (XL, lagged) had responses with two remarkable features: their firing lagged 40-80 ms behind that of XS-cells or ganglion cells at response onset, and they fired anomalously at times when XS-cells or ganglion cells would not be firing. Thus, for a flashing spot, XL-cells were inhibited from firing after stimulus onset, during the time when XS-cells or retinal X-cells had an initial transient peak in firing; XL-cells generally had an anomalous peak in firing after stimulus offset, after XS-cells or retinal X-cells had stopped firing. For a moving bar, XS-cells or retinal X-cells responded primarily while the bar was in the receptive-field center, whereas most of a typical XL-cell's response occurred after the bar had left the receptive-field center. The latencies of various features in the visual responses were analyzed. For several visual response latencies, the distribution was clearly bimodal, thus objectively demonstrating the existence of two cell classes. Using only the latencies from spot and bar responses, over 90% of these single-input cells could be reliably identified as belonging to one of the two classes. The remaining cells (7 of 128) were intermediate between the two classes in some but not all respects; because they had some properties in common, these cells were kept in a separate group (XPL, partially lagged). The axons of both XS- and XL-cells could be antidromically activated from visual cortex. Cortical latencies were typically 0.7-2.0 ms for XS-cells but much longer, typically 2.4-5.0 ms, for XL-cells. It is possible that XL-cells have not previously been recognized as a separate class because cells with such long latencies have been recorded infrequently in the past. Responses to central flashing spots were more transient than those of retinal X-cells for most XS-cells and more sustained for most XL-cells.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document