Binocular combination of contrast signals by striate cortical neurons in the monkey

A role for ocular dominance in binocular integration

Neurons in the primate primary visual cortex (V1) combine left- and right-eye information to form a binocular output. Controversy surrounds whether ocular dominance, the preference of these neurons for one eye over the other, is functionally relevant. Here, we demonstrate that ocular dominance impacts gain control during binocular combination. We recorded V1 spiking activity while monkeys passively viewed grating stimuli. Gratings were either presented to one eye (monocular), both eyes with the same contrasts (binocular balanced), or both eyes with different contrasts (binocular imbalanced). We found that contrast placed in a neuron's dominant eye was weighted more strongly than contrast placed in a neuron's non-dominant eye. This asymmetry covaried with neurons' ocular dominance. We then tested whether accounting for ocular dominance within divisive normalization improves the fit to neural data. We found that ocular dominance significantly improved model performance, with interocular normalization providing the best fits. These findings suggest that V1 ocular dominance is relevant for response normalization during binocular stimulation.

Binocular Integration in the Primate Primary Visual Cortex

binocular vision, binocular fusion, binocular combination, LGN, V1.

Stimulating both eyes with matching stimuli enhances V1 responses

Neurons in the primary visual cortex (V1) of primates play a key role in combining monocular inputs to form a binocular response. Although much has been gleaned from studying how V1 responds to discrepant (dichoptic) images, equally important is to understand how V1 responds to concordant (dioptic) images in the two eyes. Here, we investigated the extent to which concordant, balanced, zero-disparity binocular stimulation modifies V1 responses to varying stimulus contrast using intracranial multielectrode arrays. On average, binocular stimuli evoked stronger V1 activity than their monocular counterparts. This binocular facilitation scaled most proportionately with contrast during the initial transient. As V1 responses evolved, additional contrast-mediated dynamics emerged. Specifically, responses exhibited longer maintenance of facilitation for lower contrast and binocular suppression at high contrast. These results suggest that V1 processes concordant stimulation of both eyes in at least two sequential steps: initial response enhancement followed by contrast-dependent control of excitation.

Binocular Interactions in Glaucoma Patients With Nonoverlapping Visual Field Defects: Contrast Summation, Rivalry, and Phase Combination

Purpose

In glaucoma, visual field defects in the left and right eye may be non-overlapping, resulting in an intact binocular visual field. In clinical management, these patients are often considered to have normal vision. However, visual performance also relies on binocular processing. The aim of this study was to evaluate binocular visual functions in glaucoma patients with intact binocular visual field, normal visual acuity, and stereoscopy.

Methods

We measured in 10 glaucoma patients and 12 age-similar controls: (1) monocular and binocular contrast sensitivity functions (CSF) using a modified quick CSF test to assess binocular contrast summation, (2) dominance during rivalry, and (3) contrast ratio at balance point with a binocular phase combination test. A mirror stereoscope was used to combine the left and right eye image (each 10° horizontally by 12° vertically) on a display.

Results

Area under the monocular and binocular CSF was lower in glaucoma compared to healthy (P < 0.001), but the binocular contrast summation ratio did not differ (P = 0.30). For rivalry, the percentage of time of mixed percept was 9% versus 18% (P = 0.056), the absolute difference of the percentage of time of dominance between the two eyes 19% versus 10% (P = 0.075), and the rivalry rate 8.2 versus 12.1 switches per minute (P = 0.017) for glaucoma and healthy, respectively. Median contrast ratio at balance point was 0.66 in glaucoma and 1.03 in controls (P = 0.011).

Conclusions

Binocular visual information processing deficits can be found in glaucoma patients with intact binocular visual field, normal visual acuity, and stereoscopy.

Nearby contours abolish the binocular advantage

That binocular viewing confers an advantage over monocular viewing for detecting isolated low luminance or low contrast objects, has been known for well over a century; however, the processes involved in combining the images from the two eyes are still not fully understood. Importantly, in natural vision, objects are rarely isolated but appear in context. It is well known that nearby contours can either facilitate or suppress detection, depending on their distance from the target and the global configuration. Here we report that at close distances collinear (but not orthogonal) flanking contours suppress detection more under binocular compared to monocular viewing, thus completely abolishing the binocular advantage, both at threshold and suprathreshold levels. In contrast, more distant flankers facilitate both monocular and binocular detection, preserving a binocular advantage up to about four times the detection threshold. Our results for monocular and binocular viewing, for threshold contrast discrimination without nearby flankers, can be explained by a gain control model with uncertainty and internal multiplicative noise adding additional constraints on detection. However, in context with nearby flankers, both contrast detection threshold and suprathreshold contrast appearance matching require the addition of both target-to-target and flank-to-target interactions occurring before the site of binocular combination. To test an alternative model, in which the interactions occur after the site of binocular combination, we performed a dichoptic contrast matching experiment, with the target presented to one eye, and the flanks to the other eye. The two models make very different predictions for abutting flanks under dichoptic conditions. Interactions after the combination site predict that the perceived contrast of the flanked target will be strongly suppressed, while interactions before the site predict the perceived contrast will be more or less veridical. The data are consistent with the latter model, strongly suggesting that the interactions take place before the site of binocular combination.

A Canonical Laminar Neocortical Circuit Whose Bottom-Up, Horizontal, and Top-Down Pathways Control Attention, Learning, and Prediction

All perceptual and cognitive circuits in the human cerebral cortex are organized into layers. Specializations of a canonical laminar network of bottom-up, horizontal, and top-down pathways carry out multiple kinds of biological intelligence across different neocortical areas. This article describes what this canonical network is and notes that it can support processes as different as 3D vision and figure-ground perception; attentive category learning and decision-making; speech perception; and cognitive working memory (WM), planning, and prediction. These processes take place within and between multiple parallel cortical streams that obey computationally complementary laws. The interstream interactions that are needed to overcome these complementary deficiencies mix cell properties so thoroughly that some authors have noted the difficulty of determining what exactly constitutes a cortical stream and the differences between streams. The models summarized herein explain how these complementary properties arise, and how their interstream interactions overcome their computational deficiencies to support effective goal-oriented behaviors.

Contrast adaptation and interocular transfer in cortical cells: A re-analysis & a two-stage gain-control model of binocular combination

How do V1 cells respond to, adapt to, and combine signals from the two eyes? We tested a simple functional model that has monocular and binocular stages of divisive contrast gain control (CGC) that sit before, and after, binocular summation respectively. Interocular suppression (IOS) was another potential influence on contrast gain. Howarth, Vorobyov & Sengpiel (2009, Cerebral Cortex, 19, 1835-1843) studied contrast adaptation and interocular transfer in cat V1 cells. In our re-analysis we found that ocular dominance (OD) and contrast adaptation at a fixed test contrast were well described by a re-scaling of the unadapted orientation tuning curve - a simple change in response gain. We compared six variants of the basic model, and one model fitted the gain data notably better than the others did. When the dominant eye was tested, adaptation reduced cell response gain more when that eye was adapted than when the other eye was adapted. But when the non-dominant eye was tested, adapting either eye gave about the same reduction in overall gain, and there was an interaction between OD and adapting eye that was well described by the best-fitting model. Two key features of this model are that signals driving IOS arise 'early', before attenuation due to OD, while suppressive CGC signals are 'late' and so affected by OD. We show that late CGC confers a functional advantage: it yields partial compensation for OD, which should reduce ocular imbalance at the input to binocular summation, and improve the cell's sensitivity to variation in stereo disparity.

Binocular Suppression in the Macaque Lateral Geniculate Nucleus Reveals Early Competitive Interactions between the Eyes

The lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) of the dorsal thalamus is the primary recipient of the two eyes’ outputs. Most LGN neurons are monocular in that they are activated by visual stimulation through only one (dominant) eye. However, there are both intrinsic connections and inputs from binocular structures to the LGN that could provide these neurons with signals originating from the other (non-dominant) eye. Indeed, previous work introducing luminance differences across the eyes or using a single-contrast stimulus showed binocular modulation for single unit activity in anesthetized macaques and multiunit activity in awake macaques. Here, we sought to determine the influence of contrast viewed by both the non-dominant and dominant eyes on LGN single-unit responses in awake macaques. To do this, we adjusted each eye’s signal strength by independently varying the contrast of stimuli presented to the two eyes. Specifically, we recorded LGN single unit spiking activity in two awake macaques while they viewed drifting gratings of varying contrast. We found that LGN neurons of all types [parvocellular (P), magnocellular (M), and koniocellular (K)] were significantly suppressed when stimuli were presented at low contrast to the dominant eye and at high contrast to the non-dominant eye. Further, the inputs of the two eyes showed antagonistic interaction, whereby the magnitude of binocular suppression diminished with high contrast in the dominant eye, or low contrast in the non-dominant eye. These results suggest that the LGN represents a site of precortical binocular processing involved in resolving discrepant contrast differences between the eyes.

Contrast Normalization Accounts for Binocular Interactions in Human Striate and Extra-striate Visual Cortex

During binocular viewing, visual inputs from the two eyes interact at the level of visual cortex. Here we studied binocular interactions in human visual cortex, including both sexes, using source-imaged steady-state visual evoked potentials over a wide range of relative contrast between two eyes. The ROIs included areas V1, V3a, hV4, hMT⁺, and lateral occipital cortex. Dichoptic parallel grating stimuli in each eye modulated at distinct temporal frequencies allowed us to quantify spectral components associated with the individual stimuli from monocular inputs (self-terms) and responses due to interaction between the inputs from the two eyes (intermodulation [IM] terms). Data with self-terms revealed an interocular suppression effect, in which the responses to the stimulus in one eye were reduced when a stimulus was presented simultaneously to the other eye. The suppression magnitude varied depending on visual area, and the relative contrast between the two eyes. Suppression was strongest in V1 and V3a (50% reduction) and was least in lateral occipital cortex (20% reduction). Data with IM terms revealed another form of binocular interaction, compared with self-terms. IM response was strongest at V1 and was least in hV4. Fits of a family of divisive gain control models to both self- and IM-term responses within each cortical area indicated that both forms of binocular interaction shared a common gain control nonlinearity. However, our model fits revealed different patterns of binocular interaction along the cortical hierarchy, particularly in terms of excitatory and suppressive contributions.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Using source-imaged steady-state visual evoked potentials and frequency-domain analysis of dichoptic stimuli, we measured two forms of binocular interactions: one is associated with the individual stimuli that represent interocular suppression from each eye, and the other is a direct measure of interocular interaction between inputs from the two eyes. We demonstrated that both forms of binocular interactions share a common gain control mechanism in striate and extra-striate cortex. Furthermore, our model fits revealed different patterns of binocular interaction along the visual cortical hierarchy, particularly in terms of excitatory and suppressive contributions.

Binocular response modulation in the lateral geniculate nucleus

The dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus of the thalamus (LGN) receives the main outputs of both eyes and relays those signals to the visual cortex. Each retina projects to separate layers of the LGN so that each LGN neuron is innervated by a single eye. In line with this anatomical separation, visual responses of almost all of LGN neurons are driven by one eye only. Nonetheless, many LGN neurons are sensitive to what is shown to the other eye as their visual responses differ when both eyes are stimulated compared to when the driving eye is stimulated in isolation. This, predominantly suppressive, binocular modulation of LGN responses might suggest that the LGN is the first location in the primary visual pathway where the outputs from the two eyes interact. Indeed, the LGN features several anatomical structures that would allow for LGN neurons responding to one eye to modulate neurons that respond to the other eye. However, it is also possible that binocular response modulation in the LGN arises indirectly as the LGN also receives input from binocular visual structures. Here we review the extant literature on the effects of binocular stimulation on LGN spiking responses, highlighting findings from cats and primates, and evaluate the neural circuits that might mediate binocular response modulation in the LGN.

Binocular combination of stimulus orientation

When two sine waves that differ slightly in orientation are presented to the two eyes separately, a single cyclopean sine wave is perceived. However, it is unclear how the brain calculates its orientation. Here, we used a signal detection rating method to estimate the perceived orientation when the two eyes were presented with Gabor patches that differed in both orientation and contrast. We found a nearly linear combination of orientation when both targets had the same contrast. However, the binocular percept shifted away from the linear prediction towards the orientation with the higher contrast, depending on both the base contrast and the contrast ratio. We found that stimuli that differ slightly in orientation are combined into a single percept, similarly for monocular and binocular presentation, with a bias that depends on the interocular contrast ratio. Our results are well fitted by gain-control models, and are consistent with a previous study that favoured the DSKL model that successfully predicts binocular phase and contrast combination and binocular contrast discrimination. In this model, the departures from linearity may be explained on the basis of mutual suppression and mutual enhancement, both of which are stronger under dichoptic than monocular conditions.

How Does the Cerebral Cortex Work? Development, Learning, Attention, and 3-D Vision by Laminar Circuits of Visual Cortex

A key goal of behavioral and cognitive neuroscience is to link brain mechanisms to behavioral functions. The present article describes recent progress toward explaining how the visual cortex sees. Visual cortex, like many parts of perceptual and cognitive neocortex, is organized into six main layers of cells, as well as characteristic sublamina. Here it is proposed how these layered circuits help to realize processes of development, learning, perceptual grouping, attention, and 3-D vision through a combination of bottom-up, horizontal, and top-down interactions. A main theme is that the mechanisms which enable development and learning to occur in a stable way imply properties of adult behavior. These results thus begin to unify three fields: infant cortical development, adult cortical neurophysiology and anatomy, and adult visual perception. The identified cortical mechanisms promise to generalize to explain how other perceptual and cognitive processes work.

Binocular summation of chance decisions

Seeing with two eyes usually helps one respond faster. Here we show that with ambiguous stimuli, binocular viewing can paradoxically slow down reaction time. This is explained by the observers basing their decision on a noisy neuronal representation within the visual system, with the added noise breaking the symmetry between the two possible interpretations. Binocular integration improves the representation by reducing the noise, increasing ambiguity, and decision time. The neuronal Accumulator (Race) model is applied to quantify the underlying binocular integration. The model accounts for the distributions of reaction times, and predicts suboptimal integration between eyes. We conclude that under ambiguous stimulation neuronal noise within the visual system determines responses.

Binocular combination of second-order stimuli

Phase information is a fundamental aspect of visual stimuli. However, the nature of the binocular combination of stimuli defined by modulations in contrast, so-called second-order stimuli, is presently not clear. To address this issue, we measured binocular combination for first- (luminance modulated) and second-order (contrast modulated) stimuli using a binocular phase combination paradigm in seven normal adults. We found that the binocular perceived phase of second-order gratings depends on the interocular signal ratio as has been previously shown for their first order counterparts; the interocular signal ratios when the two eyes were balanced was close to 1 in both first- and second-order phase combinations. However, second-order combination is more linear than previously found for first-order combination. Furthermore, binocular combination of second-order stimuli was similar regardless of whether the carriers in the two eyes were correlated, anti-correlated, or uncorrelated. This suggests that, in normal adults, the binocular phase combination of second-order stimuli occurs after the monocular extracting of the second-order modulations. The sensory balance associated with this second-order combination can be obtained from binocular phase combination measurements.

Contrast and phase combination in binocular vision

BACKGROUND

How the visual system combines information from the two eyes to form a unitary binocular representation of the external world is a fundamental question in vision science that has been the focus of many psychophysical and physiological investigations. Ding & Sperling (2006) measured perceived phase of the cyclopean image, and developed a binocular combination model in which each eye exerts gain control on the other eye's signal and over the other eye's gain control. Critically, the relative phase of the monocular sine-waves plays a central role.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We used the Ding-Sperling paradigm but measured both the perceived contrast and phase of cyclopean images in three hundred and eighty combinations of base contrast, interocular contrast ratio, eye origin of the probe, and interocular phase difference. We found that the perceived contrast of the cyclopean image was independent of the relative phase of the two monocular gratings, although the perceived phase depended on the relative phase and contrast ratio of the monocular images. We developed a new multi-pathway contrast-gain control model (MCM) that elaborates the Ding-Sperling binocular combination model in two ways: (1) phase and contrast of the cyclopean images are computed in separate pathways, although with shared cross-eye contrast-gain control; and (2) phase-independent local energy from the two monocular images are used in binocular contrast combination. With three free parameters, the model yielded an excellent account of data from all the experimental conditions.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

Binocular phase combination depends on the relative phase and contrast ratio of the monocular images but binocular contrast combination is phase-invariant. Our findings suggest the involvement of at least two separate pathways in binocular combination.

Binocular contrast interactions: dichoptic masking is not a single process

To decouple interocular suppression and binocular summation we varied the relative phase of mask and target in a 2IFC contrast-masking paradigm. In Experiment I, dichoptic mask gratings had the same orientation and spatial frequency as the target. For in-phase masking, suppression was strong (a log-log slope of approximately 1) and there was weak facilitation at low mask contrasts. Anti-phase masking was weaker (a log-log slope of approximately 0.7) and there was no facilitation. A two-stage model of contrast gain control [Meese, T.S., Georgeson, M.A. and Baker, D.H. (2006). Binocular contrast vision at and above threshold. Journal of Vision, 6: 1224-1243] provided a good fit to the in-phase results and fixed its free parameters. It made successful predictions (with no free parameters) for the anti-phase results when (A) interocular suppression was phase-indifferent but (B) binocular summation was phase sensitive. Experiments II and III showed that interocular suppression comprised two components: (i) a tuned effect with an orientation bandwidth of approximately +/-33 degrees and a spatial frequency bandwidth of >3 octaves, and (ii) an untuned effect that elevated threshold by a factor of between 2 and 4. Operationally, binocular summation was more tightly tuned, having an orientation bandwidth of approximately +/-8 degrees , and a spatial frequency bandwidth of approximately 0.5 octaves. Our results replicate the unusual shapes of the in-phase dichoptic tuning functions reported by Legge [Legge, G.E. (1979). Spatial frequency masking in human vision: Binocular interactions. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 69: 838-847]. These can now be seen as the envelope of the direct effects from interocular suppression and the indirect effect from binocular summation, which contaminates the signal channel with a mask that has been suppressed by the target.

Laminar cortical dynamics of 3D surface perception: stratification, transparency, and neon color spreading

The 3D LAMINART neural model is developed to explain how the visual cortex gives rise to 3D percepts of stratification, transparency, and neon color spreading in response to 2D pictures and 3D scenes. Such percepts are sensitive to whether contiguous image regions have the same contrast polarity and ocularity. The model predicts how like-polarity competition at V1 simple cells in layer 4 may cause these percepts when it interacts with other boundary and surface processes in V1, V2, and V4. The model also explains how: the Metelli Rules cause transparent percepts, bistable transparency percepts arise, and attention influences transparency reversal.

The integration of multiple stimulus features by V1 neurons

We investigated how V1 neurons integrate two stimulus features by presenting stimuli from a stimulus set made up of all combinations of eight different directions of motion and nine binocular disparities. We investigated the occurrence and shape of the resulting joint tuning function. Among V1 neurons, approximately 80% were jointly tuned for disparity with orientation or direction. The joint tuning function of all jointly tuned neurons was separable into distinct tuning for disparity on the one hand, and orientation or direction tuning on the other. The degree of separability and the mutual information between the stimulus and the firing rates were strongly correlated. The mutual information of jointly tuned neurons when both features were decoded together was highly correlated with the mutual information when the two features were decoded separately, and the information was then summed. Jointly tuned neurons were just as good at representing information about single features as neurons tuned for only a single feature. The tuning properties of most jointly tuned neurons did not dynamically evolve over time, nor did jointly tuned neurons respond earlier than neurons tuned for only a single feature. The response selectivity of V1 neurons is low and decreases the information that a neuron represents about a stimulus. Together these results suggest that distinct stimulus features are integrated very early in visual processing. Furthermore, V1 generates a distributed representation through low response selectivity that avoids the curse of dimensionality by using separable joint tuning functions.

Motion repulsion is monocular

Motion repulsion is the illusory enlargement of the angle between objects moving in two different directions of motion. Previous work suggests that motion repulsion occurs under dichoptic conditions, and therefore is binocular. In reference repulsion the direction of motion is misperceived even if only a single direction of motion is presented. In an experiment I show that repulsion under dichoptic conditions is correlated with reference repulsion, but not with binocular motion repulsion. This suggests that motion repulsion proper, which occurs over and beyond reference repulsion, does not occur under dichoptic conditions, implying that motion repulsion is monocular.

A laminar cortical model of stereopsis and three-dimensional surface perception

A laminar cortical model of stereopsis and later stages of 3D surface perception is developed and simulated. The model describes how initial stages of monocular and binocular oriented filtering interact with later stages of 3D boundary formation and surface filling-in in the lateral geniculate nucleus and cortical areas V1, V2, and V4. In particular, it details how interactions between layers 4, 3B, and 2/3A in V1 and V2 contribute to stereopsis, and clarifies how binocular and monocular information combine to form 3D boundary and surface representations. Along the way, the model modifies and significantly extends the disparity energy model. Neural explanations are given for psychophysical data concerning: contrast variations of dichoptic masking and the correspondence problem, the effect of interocular contrast differences on stereoacuity, Panum's limiting case, the Venetian blind illusion, stereopsis with polarity-reversed stereograms, da Vinci stereopsis, and various lightness illusions. By relating physiology to psychophysics, the model provides new functional insights and predictions about laminar cortical architecture.

Binocular integration of partially occluded surfaces

Normal binocular vision can provide a view of an object partially occluded so that no part of it is seen by both eyes but all of it is seen by one or other eye. We used two-dimensional filtered noise textures to explore the conditions under which the visual system can piece together the monocular fragments of such occluded surfaces. When the fragments seen by left and right eyes are drawn from a continuous texture with strong horizontal correlation, observers see coherent surfaces reliably located in depth. When textures are discontinuous or have weaker horizontal correlation, or the left and right eyes' views represent unnatural depth relationships, no coherent surface is perceived, and binocular rivalry ensues. The discovery of coherent surfaces under our conditions seems to reflect the operation of a high-level integration process, failures of which drive rivalry.

Quantitative analysis of the responses of V1 neurons to horizontal disparity in dynamic random-dot stereograms

Horizontal disparity tuning for dynamic random-dot stereograms was investigated for a large population of neurons (n = 787) in V1 of the awake macaque. Disparity sensitivity was quantified using a measure of the discriminability of the maximum and minimum points on the disparity tuning curve. This measure and others revealed a continuum of selectivity rather than separate populations of disparity- and nondisparity-sensitive neurons. Although disparity sensitivity was correlated with the degree of direction tuning, it was not correlated with other significant neuronal properties, including preferred orientation and ocular dominance. In accordance with the Gabor energy model, tuning curves for horizontal disparity were adequately described by Gabor functions when the neuron's orientation preference was near vertical. For neurons with orientation preferences near to horizontal, a Gaussian function was more frequently sufficient. The spatial frequency of the Gabor function that described the disparity tuning was weakly correlated with measurements of the spatial frequency and orientation preference of the neuron for drifting sinusoidal gratings. Energy models make several predictions about the relationship between the response rates to monocular and binocular dot patterns. Few of the predictions were fulfilled exactly, although the observations can be reconciled with the energy model by simple modifications. These same modifications also provide an account of the observed continuum in strength of disparity selectivity. A weak correlation between the disparity sensitivity of simultaneously recorded single- and multiunit data were revealed as well as a weak tendency to show similar disparity preferences. This is compatible with a degree of local clustering for disparity sensitivity in V1, although this is much weaker than that reported in area MT.

Single-Unit Activity in Cortical Area MST Associated With Disparity-Vergence Eye Movements: Evidence for Population Coding

Single-unit discharges were recorded in the medial superior temporal area (MST) of five behaving monkeys. Brief (230-ms) horizontal disparity steps were applied to large correlated or anticorrelated random-dot patterns (in which the dots had the same or opposite contrast, respectively, at the two eyes), eliciting vergence eye movements at short latencies [65.8 ± 4.5 (SD) ms]. Disparity tuning curves, describing the dependence of the initial vergence responses (measured over the period 50–110 ms after the step) on the magnitude of the steps, resembled the derivative of a Gaussian, the curves obtained with correlated and anticorrelated patterns having opposite sign. Cells with disparity-related activity were isolated using correlated stimuli, and disparity tuning curves describing the dependence of these initial neuronal responses (measured over the period of 40–100 ms) on the magnitude of the disparity step were constructed ( n = 102 cells). Using objective criteria and the fuzzy c-means clustering algorithm, disparity tuning curves were sorted into four groups based on their shapes. A post hoc comparison indicated that these four groups had features in common with four of the classes of disparity-selective neurons in striate cortex, but three of the four groups appeared to be part of a continuum. Most of the data were obtained from two monkeys, and when the disparity tuning curves of all the individual neurons recorded from either monkey were summed together, they fitted the disparity tuning curve for that same animal's vergence responses remarkably well ( r 2: 0.93, 0.98). Fifty-six of the neurons recorded from these two monkeys were also tested with anticorrelated patterns, and all showed significant modulation of their activity ( P < 0.005, 1-way ANOVA). Further, when all of the disparity tuning curves obtained with these patterns from either monkey were summed together, they too fitted the disparity tuning curve for that same animal's vergence responses very well ( r 2: 0.95, 0.96). Indeed, the summed activity even reproduced idiosyncratic differences in the vergence responses of the two monkeys. Based on these and other observations on the temporal coding of events, we hypothesize that the magnitude, direction, and time course of the initial vergence velocity responses associated with disparity steps applied to large patterns are all encoded in the summed activity of the disparity-sensitive cells in MST. Latency data suggest that this activity in MST occurs early enough to play an active role in the generation of vergence eye movements at short latencies.

Short-latency disparity vergence in humans

Eye movement recordings from humans indicated that brief exposures (200 ms) to horizontal disparity steps applied to large random-dot patterns elicit horizontal vergence at short latencies (80.9 +/- 3.9 ms, mean +/- SD; n = 7). Disparity tuning curves, describing the dependence of the initial vergence responses (measured over the period 90-157 ms after the step) on the magnitude of the steps, resembled the derivative of a Gaussian, with nonzero asymptotes and a roughly linear servo region that extended only a degree or two on either side of zero disparity. Responses showed transient postsaccadic enhancement: disparity steps applied in the immediate wake of saccadic eye movements yielded higher vergence accelerations than did the same steps applied some time later (mean time constant of the decay, 200 ms). This enhancement seemed to be dependent, at least in part, on the visual reafference associated with the prior saccade because similar enhancement was observed when the disparity steps were applied in the wake of saccadelike shifts of the textured pattern. Vertical vergence responses to vertical disparity steps were qualitatively similar: latencies were longer (on average, by 3 ms), disparity tuning curves had the same general form but were narrower (by approximately 20%), and their peak-to-peak amplitudes were smaller (by approximately 70%). Initial vergence responses usually had directional errors (orthogonal components) with a very systematic dependence on step size that often approximated an exponential decay to a nonzero asymptote (mean space constant +/- SD, 1.18 +/- 0.66 degrees ). Based on the asymptotes of these orthogonal responses, horizontal errors (with vertical steps) were on average more than three times greater than vertical errors (with horizontal steps). Disparity steps >7 degrees generated "default" responses that were independent of the direction of the step, idiosyncratic, and generally had both horizontal and vertical components. We suggest that the responses depend on detectors that sense local disparity matches, and that orthogonal and "default" responses result from globally "false" matches. Recordings from three monkeys, using identical disparity stimuli, confirmed that monkeys also show short-latency disparity vergence responses (latency approximately 25 ms shorter than that of humans), and further indicated that these responses show all of the major features seen in humans, the differences between the two species being solely quantitative. Based on these data and those of others implying that foveal images normally take precedence, we suggest that the mechanisms under study here ordinarily serve to correct small vergence errors, automatically, especially after saccades.

Weighted directional energy model of human stereo correspondence

Previous work [Prince, S. J. D, & Eagle, R. A. (1999). Size-disparity correlation in human binocular depth perception. Proceedings of the Royal Society: Biological Sciences, 266, 1361-1365] has demonstrated that disparity sign discrimination performance in isolated bandpass patterns is supported at disparities much larger than a phase disparity model might predict. One possibility is that this extended performance relies on a separate second-order system [Hess, R. F., & Wilcox, L. M. (1994). Linear and non-linear filtering in stereopsis. Vision Research, 34, 2431-2438]. Here, a 'weighted directional energy' model is developed which explains a large body of crossed versus uncrossed disparity discrimination data with a single mechanism. This model assumes a population of binocular complex cells at every image point with a range of position disparity shifts. These cells sample a local energy function which is weighted so that energy at large disparities is relatively attenuated. Disparity sign is determined by summing and comparing energy at crossed and uncrossed disparities in the presence of noise. The model qualitatively predicts matching data for one-dimensional Gabor stimuli. This scheme also predicts DMax in Gabor stimuli and filtered noise. Moreover, a range of 'non-linear' phenomena, in which disparity is perceived from contrast envelope information alone, can be explained. The weighted directional energy model presents a biologically plausible, parsimonious explanation of matching behaviour in bandpass stimuli for both 'first-order' and 'second-order' stimuli which obviates the need for multiple mechanisms in stereo correspondence.

Stereo correspondence in one-dimensional Gabor stimuli

Previous data [Prince, S.J.D., & Eagle, R.A., (1999). Size-disparity correlation in human binocular depth perception. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 266, 1361-1365] have demonstrated that the upper disparity limit for stereopsis (DMax) is considerably smaller in filtered noise stereograms than in isolated Gabor patches of the same spatial frequency. This discrepancy is not currently understood. Here, the solution of the correspondence problem for bandpass stereograms was further examined. On each trial observers were presented with two one-dimensional Gabor stimuli containing disparities of equal magnitude but opposite sign. Subjects were required to indicate which interval contained the crossed disparity stimulus. It was found that matching behaviour changed as a function of Gabor envelope size. As a function of disparity magnitude, performance cycled between mostly correct and mostly incorrect at large envelope sizes but was always correct at small envelope sizes. At intermediate envelope sizes performance was cyclical at small disparities but always correct at large disparities. The critical envelope size at which performance changed from mostly correct to mostly incorrect at 270 degrees phase disparity was used as a measure of the matching performance as other parameters of the Gabor were varied. Both absolute and relative contrast were shown to influence the perceived sign of matches. Critical envelope size was also found to decrease as a function of spatial frequency, but more slowly than a phase-based limit would predict. These data cannot be predicted by current models of stereopsis, and can be used to constrain future models.

Contrast gain control in the visual cortex: monocular versus binocular mechanisms

In this study, we compare binocular and monocular mechanisms underlying contrast encoding by binocular simple cells in primary visual cortex. At mid to high levels of stimulus contrast, contrast gain of cortical neurons typically decreases as stimulus contrast is increased (). We have devised a technique by which it is possible to determine the relative contributions of monocular and binocular processes to such reductions in contrast gain. First, we model the simple cell as an adjustable linear mechanism with a static output nonlinearity. For binocular cells, the linear mechanism is sensitive to inputs from both eyes. To constrain the parameters of the model, we record from binocular simple cells in striate cortex. To activate each cell, drifting sinusoidal gratings are presented dichoptically at various relative interocular phases. Stimulus contrast for one eye is varied over a large range whereas that for the other eye is fixed. We then determine the best-fitting parameters of the model for each cell for all of the interocular contrast ratios. This allows us to determine the effect of contrast on the contrast gain of the system. Finally, we decompose the contrast gain into monocular and binocular components. Using the data to constrain the model for a fixed contrast in one eye and increased contrasts in the other eye, we find steep reductions in monocular gain, whereas binocular gain exhibits modest and variable changes. These findings demonstrate that contrast gain reductions occur primarily at a monocular site, before convergence of information from the two eyes.

Neural dynamics of binocular brightness perception

How does the visual cortex combine information from both eyes to generate perceptual representations of object surfaces? Important clues about this process may be derived from data about the perceived brightness of surface regions under binocular viewing conditions, including data about binocular brightness summation in response to Ganzfelds, the U-shaped data of Fechner's paradox that violates binocular brightness summation, and the effects of different combinations of monocular and binocular contours and surface luminance differences on threshold sensitivity to monocular flashes of light. How to reconcile these apparently contradictory data properties has been a severe challenge to previous models, and none has explained them all. The present article quantitatively simulates them all by further developing the FACADE vision model. Key model processes discount the illuminant and compute image contrasts in each monocular channel using shunting on-center off-surround networks; binocularly fuse these discounted monocular signals using shunting on-center off-surround networks with nonlinear excitatory and inhibitory signals; and use these binocularly fused activities to trigger filling-in of a binocular surface representation that represents perceived surface brightness. Previous models that have suggested explanations of subsets of these data are discussed.

Response to motion in extrastriate area MSTl: disparity sensitivity

Many neurons in the lateral-ventral region of the medial superior temporal area (MSTl) have a clear center surround separation in their receptive fields. Either moving or stationary stimuli in the surround modulates the response to moving stimuli in the center, and this modulation could facilitate the perceptual segmentation of a moving object from its background. Another mechanism that could facilitate such segmentation would be sensitivity to binocular disparity in the center and surround regions of the receptive fields of these neurons. We therefore investigated the sensitivity of these MSTl neurons to disparity ranging from three degrees crossed disparity (near) to three degrees uncrossed disparity (far) applied to both the center and the surround regions. Many neurons showed clear disparity sensitivity to stimulus motion in the center of the receptive field. About (1)/(3) of 104 neurons had a clear peak in their response, whereas another (1)/(3) had broader tuning. Monocular stimulation abolished the tuning. The prevalence of cells broadly tuned to near and far disparity and the reversal of preferred directions at different disparities observed in MSTd were not found in MSTl. A stationary surround at zero disparity simply modulated up or down the response to moving stimuli at different disparities in the receptive field (RF) center but did not alter the disparity tuning curve. When the RF center motion was held at zero disparity and the disparity of the stationary surround was varied, some surround disparities produced greater modulation of MSTl neuron response than did others. Some neurons with different disparity preferences in center and surround responded best to the relative disparity differences between center and surround, whereas others were related to the absolute difference between center and surround. The combination of modulatory surrounds and the sensitivity to relative difference between center and surround disparity make these MSTl neurons particularly well suited for the segmentation of a moving object from the background.

Residual binocular interactions in the striate cortex of monkeys reared with abnormal binocular vision

We investigated the nature of residual binocular interactions in the striate cortex (V1) of monkey models for the two most common causes of visual dysfunction in young children, specifically anisometropia and strabismus. Infant rhesus monkeys were raised wearing either anisometropic spectacle lenses that optically defocused one eye or ophthalmic prisms that optically produced diplopia and binocular confusion. Earlier psychophysical investigations had demonstrated that all subjects exhibited permanent binocular vision deficits and, in some cases, amblyopia. When the monkeys were adults, the responses of individual V1 neurons were studied with the use of microelectrode recording techniques while the animals were anesthetized and paralyzed. The manner in which the signals from the two eyes were combined in individual cells was investigated by dichoptically stimulating both eyes simultaneously with drifting sine wave gratings. In both lens- and prism-reared monkeys, fewer neurons had balanced ocular dominances and greater numbers of neurons were excited by only one eye. However, many neurons that appeared to be monocular exhibited clear binocular interactions during dichoptic stimulation. For the surviving binocular neurons, the maximum binocular response amplitudes were lower than normal; fewer neurons, particularly complex cells, were sensitive to relative interocular spatial phase disparities; and the remaining disparity-sensitive neurons exhibited lower degrees of binocular interaction. In prism-reared monkeys, an unusually high proportion of complex cells exhibited binocular suppression during dichoptic stimulation. Binocular contrast summation experiments showed that for both cooperative and antagonistic binocular interactions, contrast signals from the two eyes were combined by individual neurons in a normal linear fashion in both lens- and prism-reared monkeys. The observed binocular deficits appear to reflect a reduction in functional inputs from one eye and/or spatial imprecision in the monocular receptive fields rather than an aberrant form of binocular interaction. In the prism-reared monkeys, the predominance of suppression suggests that inhibitory connections were, however, less susceptible to diplopia and confusion than excitatory connections. Overall, there were many parallels between V1 physiology in our monkey models and the residual vision of humans with anisometropia or strabismus.

Binocular spatial phase tuning characteristics of neurons in the macaque striate cortex

We employed microelectrode recording techniques to study the sensitivity of individual neurons in the striate cortex of anesthetized and paralyzed monkeys to relative interocular image disparities and to determine the effects of basic stimulus parameters on these cortical binocular interactions. The visual stimuli were drifting sine wave gratings. After the optimal stimulus orientation, spatial frequency, and direction of stimulus movement were found, the cells' disparity tuning characteristics were determined by measuring responses as a function of the relative interocular spatial phase of dichoptic grating pairs. No attempts were made to assess absolute position disparities or horizontal disparities relative to the horopter. The majority (approximately 70%) of simple cells were highly sensitive to interocular spatial phase disparities, particularly neurons with balanced ocular dominances. Simple cells typically demonstrated binocular facilitation at the optimal phase disparity and binocular suppression for disparities 180 degrees away. Fewer complex cells were phase selective (approximately 40%); however, the range of disparity selectivity in phase-sensitive complex cells was comparable with that for simple cells. Binocular interactions in non-phase-sensitive complex cells were evidenced by binocular response amplitudes that differed from responses to monocular stimulation. The degree of disparity tuning was independent of a cell's optimal orientation or the degree of direction tuning. However, disparity-sensitive cells tended to have narrow orientation tuning functions and the degree of disparity tuning was greatest for the optimal stimulus orientations. Rotating the stimulus for one eye 90 degrees from the optimal orientation usually eliminated binocular interactions. The effects of phase disparities on the binocular response amplitude were also greatest at the optimal spatial frequency. Thus a cell's sensitivity to absolute position disparities reflects its spatial tuning characteristics, with cells sensitive to high spatial frequencies being capable of signaling very small changes in image disparity. On the other hand, stimulus contrast had relatively little effect on a cell's disparity tuning, because response saturation occurred at the same contrast level for all relative interocular phase disparities. Thus, as with orientation tuning, a cell's optimal disparity and the degree of disparity selectivity were invariant with contrast. Overall, the results show that sensitivity to interocular spatial phase disparities is a common property of striate neurons. A cell's disparity tuning characteristics appear to largely reflect its monocular receptive field properties and the interocular balance between excitatory and inhibitory inputs. However, distinct functional classes of cortical neurons could not be discriminated on the basis of disparity sensitivity alone.

Postnatal development of binocular disparity sensitivity in neurons of the primate visual cortex

In macaque monkeys, the age at which neurons in the primary visual cortex (V1) become sensitive to interocular image disparities, a prerequisite for stereopsis, is a matter of conjecture. To resolve this fundamental issue in binocular vision development, we measured the responsiveness of individual V1 neurons in anesthetized and paralyzed infant monkeys as a function of the relative, interocular, spatial phase of dichoptic sine-wave gratings. We found that an adult-like proportion of units were sensitive to interocular image disparity as early as the sixth postnatal day, several weeks before the onset age for stereopsis in monkeys. The ocular dominance distributions of cells in infant monkeys were also indistinguishable from those of adults. Thus, at or only a few days after birth, V1 neurons are capable of combining neural signals from the two eyes as in adults and are sensitive to interocular image disparities. However, the monocular spatial-frequency response properties of these disparity-sensitive units were immature, and their overall responsiveness was far lower than that in adults. During the first 4 postnatal weeks, both the spatial frequency response properties and the peak response amplitude rapidly improved, which resulted in a corresponding increase in the absolute sensitivity of individual units to interocular disparity. The results demonstrate that early binocular vision development in monkeys is not constrained by a paucity of disparity-sensitive V1 neurons but, instead, by the relative immaturity of the spatial response properties and the overall unresponsiveness of existing disparity-sensitive neurons.