Cortical magnification eliminates differences in contrast sensitivity across but not around the visual field

  1. Michael Jigo
  2. Daniel Tavdy
  3. Marc Himmelberg
  4. Marisa Carrasco  Is a corresponding author
  1. New York University, United States

Abstract

Human visual performance changes dramatically both across (eccentricity) and around (polar angle) the visual field. Performance is better at the fovea, decreases with eccentricity, and is better along the horizontal than vertical meridian and along the lower than the upper vertical meridian. However, all neurophysiological and virtually all behavioral studies of cortical magnification have investigated eccentricity effects without considering polar angle. Most performance differences due to eccentricity are eliminated when stimulus size is cortically magnified (M-scaled) to equate the size of its cortical representation in primary visual cortex (V1). But does cortical magnification underlie performance differences around the visual field? Here, to assess contrast sensitivity, human adult observers performed an orientation discrimination task with constant stimulus size at different locations as well as when stimulus size was M-scaled according to stimulus eccentricity and polar angle location. We found that although M-scaling stimulus size eliminates differences across eccentricity, it does not eliminate differences around the polar angle. This finding indicates that limits in contrast sensitivity across eccentricity and around the visual field are mediated by different anatomical and computational constraints.

Data availability

Data and code pertaining to the experiment are available on the OSF repository (https://osf.io/gvkdh/; Jigo et al., 2023)

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Michael Jigo

    Department of Psychology, New York University, New York City, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9742-4576
  2. Daniel Tavdy

    Department of Psychology, New York University, New York City, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Marc Himmelberg

    Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9133-7984
  4. Marisa Carrasco

    Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    marisa.carrasco@nyu.edu
    Competing interests
    Marisa Carrasco, Reviewing editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1002-9056

Funding

National Eye Institute (R01-EY027401)

  • Marisa Carrasco

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Human subjects: All observers provided written informed consent under the University Committee's protocol on Activities Involving Human Subjects at New York University agreeing to participate in the study and the public release of their data. All experimental procedures were approved by the Ethics Committee at the NYU Department of Psychology (IRB: FY2016-466) and were in agreement with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Copyright

© 2023, Jigo et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,149
    views
  • 163
    downloads
  • 19
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Michael Jigo
  2. Daniel Tavdy
  3. Marc Himmelberg
  4. Marisa Carrasco
(2023)
Cortical magnification eliminates differences in contrast sensitivity across but not around the visual field
eLife 12:e84205.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.84205

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.84205

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Célian Bimbard, Flóra Takács ... Philip Coen
    Tools and Resources

    Electrophysiology has proven invaluable to record neural activity, and the development of Neuropixels probes dramatically increased the number of recorded neurons. These probes are often implanted acutely, but acute recordings cannot be performed in freely moving animals and the recorded neurons cannot be tracked across days. To study key behaviors such as navigation, learning, and memory formation, the probes must be implanted chronically. An ideal chronic implant should (1) allow stable recordings of neurons for weeks; (2) allow reuse of the probes after explantation; (3) be light enough for use in mice. Here, we present the ‘Apollo Implant’, an open-source and editable device that meets these criteria and accommodates up to two Neuropixels 1.0 or 2.0 probes. The implant comprises a ‘payload’ module which is attached to the probe and is recoverable, and a ‘docking’ module which is cemented to the skull. The design is adjustable, making it easy to change the distance between probes, the angle of insertion, and the depth of insertion. We tested the implant across eight labs in head-fixed mice, freely moving mice, and freely moving rats. The number of neurons recorded across days was stable, even after repeated implantations of the same probe. The Apollo implant provides an inexpensive, lightweight, and flexible solution for reusable chronic Neuropixels recordings.

    1. Neuroscience
    Ana Fló, Lucas Benjamin ... Ghislaine Dehaene-Lambertz
    Research Article

    Interest in statistical learning in developmental studies stems from the observation that 8-month-olds were able to extract words from a monotone speech stream solely using the transition probabilities (TP) between syllables (Saffran et al., 1996). A simple mechanism was thus part of the human infant’s toolbox for discovering regularities in language. Since this seminal study, observations on statistical learning capabilities have multiplied across domains and species, challenging the hypothesis of a dedicated mechanism for language acquisition. Here, we leverage the two dimensions conveyed by speech –speaker identity and phonemes– to examine (1) whether neonates can compute TPs on one dimension despite irrelevant variation on the other and (2) whether the linguistic dimension enjoys an advantage over the voice dimension. In two experiments, we exposed neonates to artificial speech streams constructed by concatenating syllables while recording EEG. The sequence had a statistical structure based either on the phonetic content, while the voices varied randomly (Experiment 1) or on voices with random phonetic content (Experiment 2). After familiarisation, neonates heard isolated duplets adhering, or not, to the structure they were familiarised with. In both experiments, we observed neural entrainment at the frequency of the regularity and distinct Event-Related Potentials (ERP) to correct and incorrect duplets, highlighting the universality of statistical learning mechanisms and suggesting it operates on virtually any dimension the input is factorised. However, only linguistic duplets elicited a specific ERP component, potentially an N400 precursor, suggesting a lexical stage triggered by phonetic regularities already at birth. These results show that, from birth, multiple input regularities can be processed in parallel and feed different higher-order networks.