Receptive field structure in the visual cortex:
Does selective stimulation induce plasticity?
Citation Info
Gregory C. DeAngelis, Akiyuki Anzai, Izumi Ohzawa, and Ralph D. Freeman (1995)
Receptive field structure in the visual cortex:
Does selective stimulation induce plasticity?
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 92: 9682-9686.
Clicking either of the following will start a download of the document.
Please note the file size.
(4 B/W figures, 11 pages):
Compressed PostScript file
(483 kbytes, PNAS95.ps.Z) --
Acrobat file
(294 kbytes, PNAS95.pdf) --
Abstract
Sensory areas of adult cerebral cortex can reorganize in response
to long-term alterations in patterns of afferent signals. This
long-term plasticity is thought to play a crucial role in recovery
from injury and in some forms of learning. However, the degree to
which sensory representations in primary cortical areas depend on
short-term (i.e., minute to minute) stimulus variations remains
unclear. A traditional view is that each neuron in the mature
cortex has a fixed receptive field structure. An alternative view,
with fundamentally different implications for understanding cortical
function, is that each cell's receptive field is highly malleable,
changing according to the recent history of the sensory environment.
Consistent with the latter view, it has recently been reported that
selective stimulation of regions surrounding the receptive field
induces a dramatic short-term increase in receptive field size for
neurons in the visual cortex [Pettet, M. W. & Gilbert, C. D. (1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89, 8366-8370]. In contrast, we report here
that there is no change in either the size or the internal structure
of the receptive field following several minutes of surround
stimulation. However, for some cells, overall responsiveness
increases. These results suggest that dynamic alterations of
receptive field structure do not underlie short-term plasticity in
the mature primary visual cortex. However, some degree of short-term
adaptability could be mediated by changes in responsiveness.
See Also
Barbara Chapman, and Leland S. Stone (1996)
Turning a blind eye to cortical receptive fields.
Neuron 16: 9-12. (Mini Review)
[Medline]
This review article evaluates conflicting results from
Pettet, M. W. & Gilbert, C. D. (1992)
(Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89, 8366-8370)
[Medline]
and our PNAS paper.
Does selective stimulation of RF surround cause expansion of RF? (April 8, 1996)
Our response to: Barbara Chapman, and Leland S. Stone (1996)
Turning a blind eye to cortical receptive fields. Neuron 16: 9-12. (MiniReview)