Cargando…
Differences in selectivity to natural images in early visual areas (V1–V3)
High-level regions of the ventral visual pathway respond more to intact objects compared to scrambled objects. The aim of this study was to determine if this selectivity for objects emerges at an earlier stage of processing. Visual areas (V1–V3) were defined for each participant using retinotopic ma...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5446401/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28550282 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-02569-4 |
_version_ | 1783239062876848128 |
---|---|
author | Coggan, David D. Allen, Luke A. Farrar, Oliver R. H. Gouws, Andre D. Morland, Antony B. Baker, Daniel H. Andrews, Timothy J. |
author_facet | Coggan, David D. Allen, Luke A. Farrar, Oliver R. H. Gouws, Andre D. Morland, Antony B. Baker, Daniel H. Andrews, Timothy J. |
author_sort | Coggan, David D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | High-level regions of the ventral visual pathway respond more to intact objects compared to scrambled objects. The aim of this study was to determine if this selectivity for objects emerges at an earlier stage of processing. Visual areas (V1–V3) were defined for each participant using retinotopic mapping. Participants then viewed intact and scrambled images from different object categories (bottle, chair, face, house, shoe) while neural responses were measured using fMRI. Our rationale for using scrambled images is that they contain the same low-level properties as the intact objects, but lack the higher-order combinations of features that are characteristic of natural images. Neural responses were higher for scrambled than intact images in all regions. However, the difference between intact and scrambled images was smaller in V3 compared to V1 and V2. Next, we measured the spatial patterns of response to intact and scrambled images from different object categories. We found higher within-category compared to between category correlations for both intact and scrambled images demonstrating distinct patterns of response. Spatial patterns of response were more distinct for intact compared to scrambled images in V3, but not in V1 or V2. These findings demonstrate the emergence of selectivity to natural images in V3. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5446401 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-54464012017-05-30 Differences in selectivity to natural images in early visual areas (V1–V3) Coggan, David D. Allen, Luke A. Farrar, Oliver R. H. Gouws, Andre D. Morland, Antony B. Baker, Daniel H. Andrews, Timothy J. Sci Rep Article High-level regions of the ventral visual pathway respond more to intact objects compared to scrambled objects. The aim of this study was to determine if this selectivity for objects emerges at an earlier stage of processing. Visual areas (V1–V3) were defined for each participant using retinotopic mapping. Participants then viewed intact and scrambled images from different object categories (bottle, chair, face, house, shoe) while neural responses were measured using fMRI. Our rationale for using scrambled images is that they contain the same low-level properties as the intact objects, but lack the higher-order combinations of features that are characteristic of natural images. Neural responses were higher for scrambled than intact images in all regions. However, the difference between intact and scrambled images was smaller in V3 compared to V1 and V2. Next, we measured the spatial patterns of response to intact and scrambled images from different object categories. We found higher within-category compared to between category correlations for both intact and scrambled images demonstrating distinct patterns of response. Spatial patterns of response were more distinct for intact compared to scrambled images in V3, but not in V1 or V2. These findings demonstrate the emergence of selectivity to natural images in V3. Nature Publishing Group UK 2017-05-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5446401/ /pubmed/28550282 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-02569-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Coggan, David D. Allen, Luke A. Farrar, Oliver R. H. Gouws, Andre D. Morland, Antony B. Baker, Daniel H. Andrews, Timothy J. Differences in selectivity to natural images in early visual areas (V1–V3) |
title | Differences in selectivity to natural images in early visual areas (V1–V3) |
title_full | Differences in selectivity to natural images in early visual areas (V1–V3) |
title_fullStr | Differences in selectivity to natural images in early visual areas (V1–V3) |
title_full_unstemmed | Differences in selectivity to natural images in early visual areas (V1–V3) |
title_short | Differences in selectivity to natural images in early visual areas (V1–V3) |
title_sort | differences in selectivity to natural images in early visual areas (v1–v3) |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5446401/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28550282 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-02569-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT coggandavidd differencesinselectivitytonaturalimagesinearlyvisualareasv1v3 AT allenlukea differencesinselectivitytonaturalimagesinearlyvisualareasv1v3 AT farraroliverrh differencesinselectivitytonaturalimagesinearlyvisualareasv1v3 AT gouwsandred differencesinselectivitytonaturalimagesinearlyvisualareasv1v3 AT morlandantonyb differencesinselectivitytonaturalimagesinearlyvisualareasv1v3 AT bakerdanielh differencesinselectivitytonaturalimagesinearlyvisualareasv1v3 AT andrewstimothyj differencesinselectivitytonaturalimagesinearlyvisualareasv1v3 |