Neural responses to visual texture patterns in middle temporal area of the macaque monkey

1. We studied how neurons in the middle temporal visual area (MT) of anesthetized macaque monkeys responded to textured and nontextured visual stimuli. Stimuli contained a central rectangular ,figure- that was either uniform in luminance or consisted of an array of oriented line segments. The figure moved at constant velocity in one of four orthogonal directions. The region surrounding the figure was either uniform in luminance or contained a texture array (whose elements were identical or orthogonal in orientation to those of the figure), and it either was stationary or moved along with the figure. 2. A textured figure moving across a stationary textured background (,texture bar- stimulus) often elicited vigorous neural responses, but, on average, the responses to texture bars were significantly smaller than to solid (uniform luminance) bars. 3. Many cells showed direction selectivity that was similar for both texture bars and solid bars. However, on average, the direction selectivity measured when texture bars were used was significantly smaller than that for solid bars, and many cells lost significant direction selectivity altogether. The reduction in direction selectivity for texture bars generally reflected a combination of decreased responsiveness in the preferred direction and increased responsiveness in the null (opposite to preferred) direction. 4. Responses to a texture bar in the absence of a texture background (,texture bar alone-) were very similar to the responses to solid bars both in the magnitude of response and in the degree of direction selectivity. Conversely, adding a static texture surround to a moving solid bar reduced direction selectivity on average without a reduction in response magnitude. These results indicate that the static surround is largely responsible for the differences in direction selectivity for texture bars versus solid bars. 5. In the majority of MT cells studied, responses to a moving texture bar were largely independent of whether the elements in the bar were of the same orientation as the background elements or of the orthogonal orientation. Thus, for the class of stimuli we used, orientation contrast does not markedly affect the responses of MT neurons to moving texture patterns. 6. The optimum figure length and the shapes of the length tuning curves determined with the use of solid bars and texture bars differed significantly in most of the cells examined. Thus neurons in MT are not simply selective for a particular figure shape independent of whatever cues are used to delineate the figure.

Modulation by a moving texture of cat area 18 neuron responses to moving bars

1. The influence of a moving texture on neuronal responses to a moving bar was tested in 103 area 18 neurons of anesthetized and paralyzed cats. The texture was a two-dimensional noise pattern, the bar moved at optimal speed, and its contrast was adjusted to yield 50% of the maximum response. 2. The moving texture exerted two different but related effects: it suppressed the response of area 18 neurons to the moving bar, and it modulated the direction selectivity of parastriate neurons. These effects were strongest when the texture moved at the same speed or faster than the bar. 3. Genuine suppressive effects of the moving texture were distinguished from lack of summation between bar and texture responses. Suppressive effects of either type were observed in 75% of the area 18 cells and occurred more frequently among C family cells, velocity tuned cells, and in layer 5 than in other groups of cells. 4. The modulation of direction selectivity was distinguished from pseudomodulation because of lack of summation of bar and texture responses. The direction selectivity of 35% of the area 18 cells was modulated by the moving texture. Six different relative direction selectivity (RDS) types were observed in area 18. 5. The neurons of which direction selectivity was modulated by the moving texture occurred predominantly in layers 2-3 and 6, suggesting that they represent a further stage of processing within area 18. 6. Many (75%) area 18 cells responded to the texture moving on its own. Most of these cells respond to isolated features ("grains") in the patterns rather than to the movement of the whole pattern. Cells responding to the movement of the whole pattern were generally C family cells, and their direction selectivity was not modulated by the moving texture. 7. These results are compared with those obtained under identical experimental conditions in area 17. Although suppressive effects are similar in both areas, RDS types are differently distributed in the two areas. 8. The possible origins of the interactions and their functional significance are discussed.