Abstract
To identify neuronal mechanisms underlying stereopsis, we characterized interactions between inputs from the two eyes in disparity-selective neurons in macaque V1. All disparity-selective cells showed suppressive interactions between the right and left eyes, and some showed facilitatory interactions. Disparity selectivity was narrower than the receptive-field width and was constant across the receptive field. Such position-invariant disparity selectivity is also found in anesthetized cat V1. Complex cells have been suggested to inherit their disparity selectivity from simple cells with receptive fields mismatched between the two eyes. However, we found no such antecedent disparity-tuned simple cells. We did find disparity-selective cells with some simple-cell characteristics, but surprisingly, they also showed position-invariant disparity selectivity rather than simple linear binocular interactions.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Wheatstone, C. Contributions to the physiology of vision—part the first. On some remarkable, and hitherto unobserved phenomena of binocular vision. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. (Lond.) 128, 371–394 (1838).
Barlow, H. B., Blakemore, C. & Pettigrew, J. D. The neural mechanism of binocular depth discrimination. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 193, 327– 342 (1967).
Nikara, T., Bishop, P. O. & Pettigrew, J. D. Analysis of retinal correspondence by studying receptive fields of binocular single units in cat striate cortex. Exp. Brain Res. 6, 353–372 (1968).
Pettigrew, J. D., Nikara, T. & Bishop, P. O. Binocular interaction on single units in cat striate cortex: simultaneous stimulation by single moving slit with receptive fields in correspondence. Exp. Brain Res. 6, 391–410 (1968).
Joshua, D. E. & Bishop, P. O. Binocular single vision and depth discrimination. Receptive field disparities for central and peripheral vision and binocular interaction on peripheral single units in cat striate cortex. Exp. Brain Res. 10, 389– 416 (1970).
Bishop, P. O., Henry, G. H. & Smith, C. J. Binocular interaction fields of single units in the cat striate cortex. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 216, 39–68 (1971).
Fischer, B. & J. Krüger, J. Disparity tuning and binocularity of single neurons in the cat visual cortex. Exp. Brain. Res. 35, 1–8 (1979).
Ferster, D. A comparison of binocular depth mechanisms in areas 17 and 18 of the cat visual cortex. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 311, 623– 655 (1981).
Ohzawa, I. DeAngelis, G. C. & Freeman, R. D. Stereoscopic depth discrimination in the visual cortex: neurons ideally suited as disparity detectors. Science 249, 1037–1041 (1990).
Ohzawa, I., DeAngelis, G. C. & Freeman, R. D. Encoding of binocular disparity by complex cells in the cat's visual cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 77, 2879–2909 (1997).
Hubel, D. H. & Wiesel, T. N. Stereoscopic vision in macaque monkey. Cells sensitive to binocular depth in area 18 of the macaque monkey cortex. Nature 225, 41– 42 (1970).
Poggio, G. F., Doty, R. W. Jr. & Talbot, W. H. Foveal striate cortex of behaving monkey: single-neuron responses to square-wave gratings during fixation of gaze. J. Neurophysiol. 40, 1369–1391 (1977).
Clarke, P. G., Donaldson, I. M. & Whitteridge, D. Binocular visual mechanisms in cortical areas I and II of the sheep. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 256, 509–526 (1976).
Pettigrew, J. D. & Konishi, M. Neurons selective for orientation and binocular disparity in the visual Wulst of the barn owl (Tyto alba). Science 193, 675– 678 (1976).
Poggio, G. F. & Fischer, B. Binocular interaction and depth sensitivity in striate and prestriate cortex of behaving rhesus monkey. J. Neurophysiol. 40, 1392–1405 (1977).
Poggio, G. F., Gonzales, F. & Krause, F. Stereoscopic mechanisms in monkey visual cortex: binocular correlation and disparity selectivity. J. Neurosci. 8, 4531–4550 (1988).
Poggio, G. F. Mechanisms of stereopsis in monkey visual cortex. Cereb. Cortex 3, 193–204 (1995).
Hubel, D. H. & Wiesel, T. N. Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 160, 106–154 (1962).
Ohzawa, I., DeAngelis, G. C. & Freeman, R. D. Encoding disparity by simple cells in the cat's visual cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 75, 1779– 1805 (1996).
Anzai, A., Ohzawa, I. & Freeman, R. D. Neural mechanisms underlying binocular fusion and stereopsis: position vs. phase. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94, 5438–5443 (1997).
Qian, N. Binocular disparity and the perception of depth. Neuron 18, 359–368 (1997).
Jones, J. P. & Palmer, L. A. The two-dimensional spatial structure of simple receptive fields in cat striate cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 58, 1187–1211 (1987).
Livingstone, M. S. Mechanisms of direction selectivity in macaque V1. Neuron 20, 509–526 (1998).
Cumming, B. G. & Parker, A. J. Responses of primary visual cortical neurons to binocular disparity without depth perception. Nature 389, 280–283 (1997).
Movshon, J. A., Thompson, I. D. & Tolhurst, D. J. The receptive-field organization of complex cells in the cat's striate cortex. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 283, 79–99 (1978).
Livingstone, M. S. & Hubel, D. H. Anatomy and physiology of a color system in the primate visual cortex. J. Neurosci. 4, 309–356 (1984).
Hubel, D. H. & Wiesel, T. N. Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 195, 215–243 (1968).
Schiller, P. H., Finlay, B. L. & Volman, S. F. Quantitative studies of single-cell properties in monkey striate cortex. I. Spatiotemporal organization of receptive fields. J. Neurophysiol. 39, 1288– 1319 (1976).
Blasdel, G. G. & Fitzpatrick, D. Physiological organization of layer 4 in macaque striate cortex. J. Neurosci. 4, 880–895 (1984).
Gonzalez, F., Alonso, J. M., Relova, J. L. & Perez, R. Receptive field asymmetries and sensitivity to random dot stereograms. Arch. Ital. Biol. 134, 169–184 (1996).
Anzai, A., Ohzawa, I. & Freeman, R. D. Neural mechanisms for processing binocular information. I. Simple cells. J. Neurophysiol. (in press).
Koch C. & Poggio, T. in Synaptic Function(eds. Edelman, G. M., Gall, W. E. & Cowan, W. M.) 637– 685 (Wiley, New York, 1987).
Mel, B. W., Ruderman, D. L. & Archie, K. A. in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems Vol. 10 (eds. Jordan, M. I., Kearns, M. J. & Solla, S. A.) 208–214 (MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1998).
Mel, B. W., Ruderman, D. L. & Archie, K. A. Translation-invariant orientation tuning in visual "complex" cells could derive from intradendritic computations. J. Neurosci. 18, 4325–4334 (1998).
Mel, B. W. Synaptic integration in an excitable dendritic tree. J. Neurophysiol. 70, 1086–1101 (1993).
Wurtz, R. H. Visual receptive fields of striate cortex neurons in awake monkeys. J. Neurophysiol. 32, 727–742 (1969).
Judge, S. J. et al. Implantation of magnetic search coils for measurement of eye position: an improved method. Vision Res. 20, 535–538 (1980).
Motter, B. C. & Poggio, G. F. Binocular fixation in the rhesus monkey: spatial and temporal characteristics. Exp. Brain Res. 54, 304–314 (1984).
Trotter, Y. et al. Modulation of neural stereoscopic processing in primate area V1 by viewing distance. Science 257, 1279–1282 (1992).
Snodderly, D. M. & Gur, M. Organization of striate cortex of alert, trained monkeys (Macaca fascicularis): ongoing activity, stimulus selectivity, and widths of receptive field activating regions. J. Neurophysiol. 74, 2100–2125 (1995).
Acknowledgements
This work was funded by NIH grant EY10203. David Freeman did the computer programming. Gail Robertson provided technical assistance. Clay Reid, Bevil Conway, Terrence Sejnowski, Rajesh Rao, Niall McLoughlin, Bartlett Mel and Tomaso Poggio provided suggestions on the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Supplementary information
These two figures show the spatial resolution of our reverse-correlation mapping technique after correction for eye position. The first figure shows binocular response maps and receptive-field profiles for two binocular, nonstereo-tuned cells that had small receptive fields, to demonstrate the resolution of the technique for both eyes mapped simultaneously. These cells had receptive fields very near the fovea, so the receptive fields were relatively small, allowing us to compare the resolution of the mapping for the two eyes. Despite monitoring only one eye, the receptive-field maps for both cells were approximately the same size for the two eyes. The fact that the right-eye maps were not noticeably less precise than the left-eye maps indicates that, at least during these mapping sessions, most of the time the monkey kept his eyes at a constant vergence, presumably because he was fixated on the plane of the monitor. The maps of foveal receptive fields in the first figure show that we could map receptive fields at least as small as 0.2ƒ wide. We never mapped smaller receptive fields, so that may be the resolution limit of our technique.
Figure 1
(GIF 59.1 KB)
Binocular-response maps (first and third rows) and receptive-field profiles (second and fourth rows) for two parafoveal binocular cells with tiny receptive fields recorded in alert macaque V1. The receptive-field eccentricities for these two cells were 1.5ƒ for the upper cell and 1.6ƒ for the lower cell. For the maps, two bar stimuli, one for each eye, were flashed simultaneously. The binocular-response maps represent firing rate as a function of stimulus location on the left retina (horizontal axis) and right retina (vertical axis). Vertical and horizontal lines in each panel indicate the center of the stimulus-presentation range for the left and right eyes, respectively. The binocular-interaction maps in the first row and the receptive-field profiles in the second row are from one cell, and the maps in the third row and the profiles in the fourth row are from a another cell. The left column shows responses to light bars on a black background, and the right column shows responses to dark bars on a light background. In the receptive-field profiles, red traces indicate right-eye responses; green, left-eye responses. Note that the horizontal arms and red traces (right-eye response; unmonitored eye) are not much less precise than the vertical arms and green traces. Note also that the receptive field widths (height at 1/e of peak) are about 0.2ƒ wide.
Figure 2
(GIF 68.9 KB)
The second figure shows that we can map receptive-field subunits at eccentricities as small as4-6ƒ, at least for some cells. This figure shows binocular-interaction maps for three monocular units that showed spatial segregation of ON and OFF responses. Each row represents a different cell mapped with light bars or dark bars, as indicated. (We deduce that these cells were monocular because they show only one arm instead of a cross in the binocular reponse profiles.) The middle unit was not orientation selective and was recorded in the white matter, and therefore probably represents a geniculate afferent fiber. It shows center/surround antagonism, in that a 0.3ƒ wide area shows an excitatory response to dark stimuli, and a slightly wider (0.5ƒ) region shows inhibition by light stimuli. The upper and lower units were orientation selective and, on physiological criteria, were probably located in layer 4C. The lower unit shows a central dark-excitatory region flanked by two light-excitatory regions. The upper unit shows spatially offset light-excitatory and dark-excitatory subregions, with the OFF subregion lying to the left of the ON subregion. The top cell had a receptive-field eccentricity of 4.6ƒ; the middlecell, 5ƒ and the bottom cell, 5.5ƒ. Conventions as in Fig. 1. The vertical maps (top and bottom rows) represent cells driven only by the left eye; the middle map represents a cell driven by the right eye.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Livingstone, M., Tsao, D. Receptive fields of disparity-selective neurons in macaque striate cortex . Nat Neurosci 2, 825–832 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1038/12199
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/12199
This article is cited by
-
The Active Side of Stereopsis: Fixation Strategy and Adaptation to Natural Environments
Scientific Reports (2017)
-
The binocular neural mechanism: disparity coding schemes and population coding
Science China Information Sciences (2015)
-
High-resolution eye tracking using V1 neuron activity
Nature Communications (2014)
-
Sensors for impossible stimuli may solve the stereo correspondence problem
Nature Neuroscience (2007)
-
An unexpected specialization for horizontal disparity in primate primary visual cortex
Nature (2002)