|
|
| |||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||
| Copyright © 2001 Cell
Press. Neuron, Vol 32, 185-201, October 2001 |
| Review |
| Figuring Space by
Time |
| Ehud Ahissar and Amos Arieli |
Department of Neurobiology, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 76100, Israel |
| Correspondence: Ehud Ahissar +972-8-934-3748 (phone) +972-8-934-4140 (fax) |
Ehud Ahissar||Amos Arieli |
Sensory information is encoded both in space and in time. Spatial encoding is based on the identity of activated receptors, while temporal encoding is based on the timing of activation. In order to generate accurate internal representations of the external world, the brain must decode both types of encoded information, even when processing stationary stimuli. We review here evidence in support of a parallel processing scheme for spatially and temporally encoded information in the tactile system and discuss the advantages and limitations of sensory-derived temporal coding in both the tactile and visual systems. Based on a large body of data, we propose a dynamic theory for vision, which avoids the impediments of previous dynamic theories.
Visual and tactile systems share two major strategies: both employ two-dimensional arrays of receptors to capture the spatial variations of the external stimuli, and both employ movements of the sensory organs during active sensing epochs. These movements prevent receptor adaptation when the stimulus is stationary, which allows the sensation of a stationary environment and thus provides a significant evolutionary advantage over species that can sense only external movements or changes. The movements of the sensory organs induce encoding of spatial details in time, in addition to the straightforward encoding in space. However, most of the research on the encoding of stationary stimuli has focused so far on the spatial dimension alone. Temporal encoding of stationary stimuli has been largely ignored, in particular with tactile and visual sensations. We will first review the experimental data describing the sensor movement-based temporal coding scheme in the somatosensory system, focusing on object localization in the rat vibrissal system. Then, we will describe the evidence supporting a similar scheme in the visual system. Finally, we will outline the framework of a new dynamic theory for vision that emerges from these data. Temporal Encoding-Decoding in the Tactile System Tactile sensation depends on changes. To perceive stationary objects, the sensory organ has to move. Thus, primates move their fingers across surfaces they try to identify, and rodents, such as rats, move their whiskers in order to localize and identify objects. Temporal Encoding of Vibrissal Touch and Possible Decoding Schemes The rat vibrissal system provides a clear example of a dissociated spatiotemporal coding scheme. The mystacial pad of the rat contains about 35 large whiskers, which are arranged in five rows and about seven arcs (columns) (Figure 1). To obtain sensory information, such as the location and texture of external objects (Gustafson and Felbain-Keramidas, 1977 ; Simons, 1995 ), the whiskers
move back and forth with a rhythmic motion (''whisking'') at
4–10 Hz (Carvell and Simons, 1990 ; Fanselow and Nicolelis,
1999 ; Kleinfeld et
al., 1999 ; Welker, 1964 ), covering
several cubic centimeters near the snout (Brecht et al., 1997
; Wineski, 1983 ). Each whisker
along the same arc scans a different trajectory, while all the
whiskers of the same row scan roughly the same
trajectory (Brecht et al., 1997 ). The vertical location of
a punctuate object can be extracted from the
identity of activated whiskers along each arc. We use the
term ''spatial coding'' to refer to this kind of coding, which
is based on the spatial profile of whisker activation. The
radial location (i.e., the distance from the face) might
also be encoded by whisker identity, due to the gradient
of whisker lengths along the rows (Brecht et al., 1997 ). In contrast, the
identity of active whiskers would provide no information about
the horizontal location of the object (i.e., its location
along the anterior-posterior axis, parallel to the whisker
rows). This is because the whiskers are moving along
this axis. However, information about the horizontal location
of the object can be extracted from the timing of
whisker activation: the temporal interval between whisker
activation at protraction onset and at the moment of touch is
proportional to the spatial distance between whisker retracted
position and object position (Ahissar and Zacksenhouse, 2001 ). This is a form
of temporal encoding: the horizontal location of the
object (in relative coordinates) is encoded by this
temporal interval.
Existing data and simple reasoning suggest that temporal encoding of object location along the horizontal axis, i.e., along the whisking path, should probably work as follows (Figure 2A): during free-air whisking, each whisker induces spike bursts in the brainstem, whose duration is determined by the duration of the protraction phase (i.e., forward movement, Figure 2A; see Ahissar et al., 2000 ; Nicolelis et al., 1995 ; Shipley, 1974 ). When an
object is introduced into the whisking field ( Figure
2A, black circle), an additional burst will be
generated during protraction (Zucker and Welker, 1969 ). The onset of
the additional burst will be at the time of touch. If
the object is located more anteriorly (gray circle), the
onset of the additional burst will be delayed. Thus, the
horizontal location of the object is encoded by the temporal
interval between the two afferent bursts. We ignore here
the events occurring during the retraction phase, which is
considered to be a resetting phase (Kleinfeld et al., 1999 ).
The horizontal location of objects could, in principle, be represented by this temporal code throughout its processing in the brain. However, in order to establish a complete representation of the location of the object, this information must ultimately integrate with other sensory information—in particular, with that of the vertical and radial location components, which seem to be coded differently. Furthermore, in order to eventually control motor activity, the sensory-derived representations should probably be coded by some form of coding which is not based on accurate sensory timing, most likely a rate population code (Fetz, 1993 ; Georgopoulos, 1986 ; Kleinfeld et al., 1999 ; Salinas et al., 2000 ; Shadlen and
Newsome, 1994 ; Wise, 1993 ; Zhang and
Barash, 2000 ). Thus, the
temporally encoded information is probably translated into a
different coding scheme. We call this translation here
''decoding'' or ''recoding'' (Perkel and Bullock, 1968 ), meaning that
the sensory encoding is translated into another code, which is
used for internal representations.The temporally encoded information could be decoded by feedforward bottom-up transformations, without any reference to internally generated expectations ( Figure 3A, ''passive decoding''). For example, temporal intervals can be converted to spatial representations utilizing neuronal delay lines (Carr, 1993 ; Jeffress, 1948 ) or other
time-dependent properties (Buonomano and Merzenich, 1995 ) and only feedforward
connections. Alternatively, temporal decoding could be achieved
by means of comparisons with internal expectations (Figure
3A). We term such a decoding process, in which the
transformation is not determined a priori but rather is
dynamically controlled by autonomous neuronal agents, an
''active decoding.'' This decoding scheme requires the
existence of independent internal ''temporal rulers'' which
are compared with and thus provide a measure of the
temporal intervals of the input (Ahissar, 1998 ; Ahissar and Vaadia, 1990
; see also Talbot
et al., 1968 ). Evidence
collected from cortical and thalamic neurons in anesthetized
(Ahissar et al., 1997, 2000 ) and freely
moving (Nicolelis et al., 1995 ) rats indicate
that in the rat temporal decoding is probably achieved
actively (Ahissar and Zacksenhouse, 2001 ), using a scheme
previously suggested for temporal decoding in primates (Ahissar
and Vaadia, 1990 ). According to this
scheme, intrinsic cortical oscillators constitute the internal
''temporal rulers'' (Ahissar, 1998 ; Ahissar and Vaadia, 1990
). This decoding
scheme requires the existence of independent oscillators in the
somatosensory cortex, oscillators that can lock their firing
phases to periodic inputs and track changes of the
instantaneous input frequency (Ahissar, 1998 ; Ahissar and Vaadia, 1990
).
Spontaneous single-cell oscillations were described in the somatosensory cortices of both primates (Ahissar and Vaadia, 1990 ; Lebedev and Nelson, 1995
) and rodents
(Ahissar et al., 1997 ). These neurons tend
to oscillate at a given frequency in the absence of
any sensory stimulus, but, once a stimulus is applied, they
lock to the input frequency, provided that the input frequency
is not too far from their spontaneous oscillating frequency. In
the rodents (rats and guinea pigs), the oscillation
frequencies center around 10 Hz, whereas those of the
primates (macaque monkeys) center around 30 Hz. If these
oscillators participate in the decoding of temporal
sensory information, then this difference should be paralleled
by differences in the two sensory systems. Indeed, temporal
encoding in the primate tactile system mainly involves
rapidly adapting receptors, which are most sensitive around 30
Hz (Talbot et al., 1968 ), whereas the rat
vibrissal system employs a sampling process (''whisking'') at
around 10 Hz (see Ahissar, 1998 ).Elimination of Implausible Active Decoding Schemes As far as we can see, decoding by local oscillators could take one of three forms: open loop, closed loop, or direct coupling (Figure 3A). All these models utilize local oscillators in different ways and thus yield different predictions (Ahissar, 1995 , 1998 ; Ahissar et al., 1997 ; Ermentrout and Kleinfeld,
2001 ; Kleinfeld et
al., 1999 ). We tested
these predictions experimentally, beginning at the cortex of
anesthetized rats and guinea pigs (these two species
demonstrate similar relevant anatomical structures and
physiological characteristics, despite their different whisking
behavior [Haidarliu and Ahissar, 1997] ).Based on the results obtained from the barrel cortex (Ahissar et al., 1997 ), both the direct
coupling and open-loop models for decoding were rejected, while
a specific closed-loop model, named the Neuronal Phase-Locked
Loop (NPLL, Figure
3A), was supported. The NPLL is based on a closed-loop
circuit in which thalamic neurons function as comparators; they
compare the timing of the ascending whisker input with the
timing of the descending signal (which is driven by
the cortical oscillators). The difference between the two
signals, which is the output of the circuit, changes the
cortical oscillating frequency. Decoding by NPLLs is supported
by the following findings: (1) cortical oscillators track input
frequencies, (2) cortical delays increase with increasing input
frequencies, and (3) spike counts of cortical populations
decrease with increasing frequencies (Ahissar et al., 1997 ). Moreover, the specific
polarity of these dependencies supports a specific subclass
of NPLLs, the one termed ''inhibitory PLL'' or iPLL
(Ahissar, 1998 ). However, not all
cortical neurons behave according to the NPLL predictions;
about 25% of the neurons we tested did not display latency
shifts with increasing frequencies (ibid.). Thus, if NPLLs are
implemented in this system, they are probably implemented by
a subgroup of somatosensory neurons. One possibility is
that NPLLs are implemented by only one of the two
thalamocortical systems of the vibrissal system: the lemniscal
or paralemniscal.Parallel Afferent Pathways Vibrissal information is conveyed to the barrel cortex via two parallel pathways: the lemniscal and paralemniscal (Woolsey, 1997 ). The
lemniscal pathway ascends via the ventral posterior
medial nucleus (VPM) of the thalamus, and the paralemniscal
pathway ascends via the medial division of the posterior
nucleus (POm). The VPM projects to the barrels in layer 4 and
to layers 5b and 6a and receives feedback from
layers 5b and 6a (Bourassa et al., 1995 ; Chmielowska et al., 1989
; Lu and Lin, 1993
). The POm
projects to layers 1 and 5a and to the septa separating
the barrels in layer 4 and receives feedback from layers
5 and 6b (Bourassa et al., 1995 ; Diamond, 1995 ; Koralek et al., 1988 ; Lu and Lin, 1993 ). Thus, the
thalamocortical loops formed by the two pathways are, to a
large extent, separated. The main differences between the
responses to whisker stimulations in the two systems are
that paralemniscal latencies are more variable, the responses
are weaker, and the RF cores are larger (Ahissar et al.,
2000 ; Armstrong-James
and Fox, 1987 ; Armstrong-James et al.,
1992 ; Brumberg et al.,
1999 ; Diamond et al.,
1992b ; Friedberg et
al., 1999 ; Nicolelis and Chapin,
1994 ; Simons, 1978 ). Furthermore,
the cortico-POm connections are exceptionally strong (Diamond et al.,
1992a ; Hoogland et al.,
1988 ).The existence of two nearly parallel pathways to the cortex has been puzzling. One possibility is that the POm does not process vibrissal information directly but rather processes the output of the lemniscal pathway in series to lemniscal processing (Diamond et al., 1992a ; Hoogland et al., 1988 ). This scheme views
nonlemniscal thalamic nuclei as higher order nuclei, which
process the output of primary cortical areas and on
which the ascending sensory connections exert only a
modulatory action (Kaas and Ebner, 1998 ). Another possibility,
however, is that the paralemniscal pathway directly processes
sensory information, in parallel to the lemniscal pathway.
Under this hypothesis, the paralemniscal pathway processes
sensory information that is different from the information
processed by the lemniscal pathway and whose processing
requires spatial integration, strong cortical feedback, and
variable delays.Evidence for Parallel Afferent Processing To probe the type of processing performed in each pathway, we examined the development of the neuronal representations of a basic sensory variable—the temporal frequency of whisker movement. Recordings from all major stations along the two afferent pathways, from brainstem to cortex, in anesthetized rats (see Haidarliu et al., 1999 , for methods) showed that
the temporal frequency of whisker movement is represented
differently in the two pathways: primarily by response
amplitude (i.e., instantaneous firing rate) in the lemniscal
and primarily by latency in the paralemniscal pathways (Ahissar
et al., 2000 , 2001 ; Sosnik et al., 2001 ). These internal
representations are first expressed in the thalamus and
are preserved in the corresponding cortical domains of
each pathway. Both amplitude and latency representations result
in spike count representation (i.e., total number of spikes per
stimulus cycle). The paralemniscal latency code and the
translation of the latency code to a spike count code are
essential features of the NPLL model (Ahissar, 1998 ). In fact, the
increased latency as a function of input frequency, found in
thalamic and cortical paralemniscal neurons (Figure
3C), are predicted by the NPLL model, whereas constant
or decreasing latencies are predicted by the open loop,
passive, or direct coupling models (Figure
3B). Thus, the results of this study are consistent
with temporal decoding performed by the paralemniscal system,
using an NPLL-like algorithm (Ahissar et al., 2000 ).An additional finding of this study was that neuronal representations of the whisker frequency varied among layers of the same cortical columns according to their thalamic affiliation. This was evident during vertical penetrations into the cortex of anesthetized rats while moving the whiskers with air puffs (Ahissar et al., 2001 ). When
recording from barrel neurons in layer 4, the response
latency was usually constant for stimulation frequencies
between 2 and 11 Hz. However, upon moving from the barrels in
layer 4 to layer 5a, a robust latency representation of
the whisker frequency emerged. Upon moving further down, to
layer 5b, a response pattern similar to that of
layer 4 barrels was revealed. Thus, although the two
different thalamocortical systems (lemniscal and paralemniscal)
share the same cortical columns, they utilize different coding
schemes to represent the whisker frequency. Interestingly,
neurons in layer 2/3 displayed an integration of these two
coding schemes: with increasing frequencies, both latency increments
and amplitude reductions were evident. These latter
observations are consistent with the anatomical organization of
the cortex, where layer 2/3 integrates neuronal data from
both granular and infragranular layers (Kim and Ebner, 1999 ; Staiger et al., 2000 ) and
outputs the results of local computations to higher order
cortical areas (Felleman and Van Essen, 1991 ). In addition, layer
2/3 neurons project also to the infragranular layers
(Bernardo et al., 1990 ; Gottlieb and Keller, 1997
; Keller, 1995 ; Kim and Ebner, 1999 ; Staiger et al., 2000 ). The function of
these projections is not yet clear.Neural Representations and Code Transformation We use the term ''neuronal representation'' here to refer to a neuronal variable that changes as a function of a stimulus quantity in such a manner that the quantity can be reconstructed from the variable. (We thank our colleague Shabtai Barash for this definition.) Obviously, not every neuronal variable that fulfills the above definition necessarily fulfills the definition of an ''internal representation'' (Dudai, 1989 ). Our recordings from the
brainstem, thalamus, and cortex revealed several such neuronal
variables that represent the whisker temporal frequency. These
were, in different stations, firing rate, latency, and spike
count. All these representations appeared first at the thalamus
(firing rate and spike count at the VPM and latency and
spike count at the POm) and were preserved at the cortex
(Ahissar et al., 2000 ). The cortical spike
count representation can be modified by experience in
a state-dependent manner (Shulz et al., 2000 ).Several transformations were thus observed along the processing pathways from the whiskers to the cortex. The first was the transformation from a simple repetition code at the brainstem to more abstract representations at the thalamus. At the brainstem, burst onset times simply followed stimulus onset times, whereas other neuronal variables remained constant. Thus, the only representation of the stimulus frequency at the brainstem was by interbursts intervals. At the thalamus, this information was translated to two response variables: amplitude (firing rate) at the VPM and latency at the POm. These two representation codes were further transformed into a third, common code—spike count; since response offset timing was constant, both amplitude reduction and latency increments induced spike count reductions. These results demonstrate that, contrary to the classical view, both VPM and POm do not merely relay the sensory information to the cortex but rather actively participate in its processing. These results are in line with recent findings of spatial transformations at the VPM (Ghazanfar and Nicolelis, 1997 ; Nicolelis and Chapin,
1994 ).Temporal (Latency) Coding Temporal coding is often associated with fixed response latencies (for a review of several examples, see Carr, 1993 ). However, it is important
to note that while fixed response latencies are
crucial for relaying temporal cues, latencies are not
required to be fixed during the processing of
these cues. In contrast, fixed response latencies are crucial
for the processing of spatial cues obtained by
moving sensory organs, such as the whiskers. This is because,
during whisking, computations of spatial details must consider
the time of activation of the activated whiskers, which are in
constant motion. Unreliable latencies will distort the
perceived image. Imagine, for example, two whiskers of the same
arc moving across a vertical edge. If latencies are not
reliable, the two signals (single spikes or bursts) arriving to
the thalamus might be delayed from each other and
thus interpreted as representing a spatial offset that does not
exist. Thus, the fixed latencies observed in the lemniscal
system, taken together with the superior spatial resolution in
this system, is consistent with the processing of spatial cues,
probably those encoded along individual whiskers'
arcs.Unlike the lemniscal system, latencies of the paralemniscal neurons varied with the input frequency. This variation was not random but rather consistent and monotonous, such that response latencies were directly related to the input frequency. As such, paralemniscal latencies could serve as internal representations of the whisker frequency, representations that are used for further computations downstream. Alternatively, paralemniscal latencies could be an intermediate variable that is used locally for temporal processing. Temporal Decoding The decoding scheme suggested by the results presented above is demonstrated in Figure 2B. The decoding of horizontal object location is based on thalamic gating (McCormick and von Krosigk, 1992 ; Sherman and Guillery,
1996 ). The
gating signal is mediated by the strong cortical feedback
connections to the POm (Diamond et al., 1992a ; Hoogland et al., 1987 ). If the gating
onset occurs at a constant delay from protraction onset, the
decoding is simple: the amount (number) of spikes ''passing''
the gate will be proportional to the delay between
protraction onset and touch (Figure
2B). Thus, output spike counts now code horizontal
object location. Note that the spike count coding will be a
monotonous function of the location of the object only
if the gating signal appears at the ''appropriate'' delay
from whisking onset. This delay is determined by the negative
closed loop established by the NPLL, which, for each stimulus
frequency, keeps a specific constant delay between the cortical
oscillators and the input (Ahissar, 1998 ; Ahissar et al., 1997 ). This constant delay
and the associated spike count (at free-air whisking)
establish the set point of the loop.According to the NPLL model, the latency variations do not establish a solid representation of the input frequency but rather are intermediary to obtaining a robust spike count representation. This mechanism provides a strong prediction: if a temporal input parameter other than the frequency will change, the spike count coding should remain intact, and this should be obtained by adjusting the latency. Alternatively, if the latency coding is a solid one, it should not change by this manipulation. To test this prediction, we varied the input pulse width. Instead of a natural-like pulse width of 50 ms, we applied the same stimuli as before with a pulse width of 20 ms. This manipulation almost abolished the paralemniscal latency coding. In contrast, the spike count coding remained unchanged. Moreover, the spike count coding remained unchanged because the latency variations were strongly reduced; had the latency coding been less affected, the spike count coding would be forced to change (Ahissar et al., 2001 ; Sosnik et al., 2001 ). This finding
strongly suggests that the response latency is an
intermediary for obtaining the spike count code and
is thus adaptively adjusted to match variations in the
stimulus parameters.Working Model for Object Localization by Whisking The data collected in our experiments, together with data collected by others, led us to suggest a novel encoding-decoding scheme for the rat vibrissal system (Ahissar and Zacksenhouse, 2001 ). According to our
scheme, the vertical component of the location of an
object is encoded by arcs of whiskers and is decoded by the
lemniscal system. The horizontal component of the location
is encoded by rows of whiskers and is decoded by the
paralemniscal system. With this scheme, constant latencies
preserved along the lemniscal pathway enable reliable lateral
comparisons along the arc representations in the thalamus and
cortex. This computation is probably based on rate, since the
identity of an activated whisker is rate coded. Such an
arc-based computation in the VPM is supported by recent
findings (Ghazanfar and Nicolelis, 1997 ; Ghazanfar et al., 2000 ). In the paralemniscal
system, the temporal-to-rate transformation results in a rate
code representation of the horizontal spatial component. This
component is encoded in time by the whiskers (see
''Temporal Encoding of Vibrissal Touch and Possible Decoding
Schemes'' above). The rate-coded representations that result
from the parallel computations along the two pathways can be
integrated in the barrel cortex (probably in layer 2/3, see
Ahissar et al., 2001 ) to generate a
two-dimensional (forward-upward) representation of the object
location. The encoding-decoding scheme for the third dimension
(the radial distance from the snout, see Brecht et al., 1997 ) as well as the
relation between the decoding processes postulated here and the
sensory-derived cortical representation of whisker position
(Fee et al., 1997 ) are not yet
clear.Reservations Two important reservations should be briefly mentioned. First, the above observations have been obtained in anesthetized animals. In anesthetized animals, the physiological conditions of the neurons are affected by the anesthesia (Simons et al., 1992 ), and the
motor-sensory loop is ''open.'' That is, sensory acquisition
does not depend on the motor system, as it does during whisking
(Kleinfeld et al., 1999 ). While
anesthesia is unlikely to account for the marked latency
shifts observed in the paralemniscal system, natural whisking
might induce specific computational constraints that are not
expressed in the anesthetized animal. Thus, the working
hypothesis we developed should be tested in freely moving
animals while they are localizing or identifying
objects.A second reservation is that our theoretical analysis deals so far only with simple tasks: localization of a single punctuate object. What if the whiskers scan a large object with a complex texture? What would temporal and spatial encoding mean, and how would the information be decoded in this case? Although this topic deserves a separate investigation, it is worth mentioning that the principles of sensory coding remain similar. Here again, temporal encoding occurs along the rows: the spatial intervals (between texture edges) along the movement trajectory of each whisker are translated to temporal intervals. Along the arcs, however, a spatiotemporal coding occurs: the spatial offsets along the arcs are encoded by temporal delays between the firing of adjacent whiskers. Note also that edge orientations are encoded by temporal delays along the arcs. The temporally encoded information generated by the interaction of whisker movement and textures contains high frequencies. These frequencies depend on the whisker velocity and the texture's spatial frequencies and are usually well above 10 Hz (Carvell and Simons, 1995 ). Since the decoding range
of the paralemniscal system is limited to the whisking
frequencies, i.e., <10 Hz, this information must be processed
by the lemniscal system. Whether NPLLs of frequencies
>10 Hz exist in the lemniscal system has to be
tested by investigating the latency and spike count coding of
stimulus frequencies between 10 and 100 Hz or even
higher.Temporal Encoding-Decoding in the Visual System The eye is often referred to as a still camera, which captures sequences of frozen snapshots of the visual scene. According to this view, the signals transmitted from the retina are encoded spatially; that is, the image can be reconstructed from the identities of those ganglion cells that were active during a given fixational pause, similar to the encoding of the image by a photographic film. However, an inspection of the characteristics of the fixational eye movements and of the retina shows that this could not be the case. Saccades, Fixational Pauses, and Fixational Eye Movements During natural viewing, the eyes are never still. The eyes move from one target to another, using saccadic jumps, and dwell on each target for a fixational pause of a few hundred milliseconds. In some cases, as during the performance of a psychophysical task or during careful observation, the eyes fixate on a single target for a few seconds. But even during fixation or fixational pauses, the eyes are not still. They usually drift and tremble across several arcminutes with amplitudes that fall off with the frequency (Eizenman et al., 1985 ; Findlay, 1971 ) (Figures 4,
5A, and 5C) . These fixational
miniature eye movements (FeyeM) cover the entire spectrum
between 1 to more than 100 Hz (Figures 5A
and 5C), with an increased tendency to oscillate within
two main frequency ranges: one between 1 and 20 Hz (''drifts'')
with amplitudes of up to about 10 arcminutes (') and another
between 40 and 100 Hz (''tremor'') with amplitudes between
a few arcseconds ( ) and a few arcminutes (Barlow,
1952 ; Bengi and
Thomas, 1972 ; Coakley, 1983 ; Eizenman et al., 1985 ; Ratliff and Riggs, 1950
; Shakhnovich,
1977 ; Spauschus et
al., 1999 ; Yarbus, 1967 ). These movements
can be interrupted by ''microsaccades''—brief movements of a
few arcminutes. One can estimate the low-frequency components
of his own FeyeM by observing the movements of afterimages,
i.e., images that are temporarily imprinted on the retina
following endured fixation, while fixating the eyes (Verheijen,
1961 ). Another
way to estimate these movements is by looking at a
patch of static random noise after adaptation to a smaller
patch of dynamic noise (Murakami and Cavanagh, 1998 ).
What Are the FeyeM for? The eyes are fast responding devices whose muscles are in a constant tonus. Thus, one possibility is that the FeyeM are an unavoidable ''noise'' caused by unbalanced tonus between antagonist muscles (Carpenter, 1988 ). Even if this was
the case, this noise is a fortunate noise, since it keeps
stationary images from fading away (Coppola and Purves, 1996 ; Ditchburn, 1973 ; Pritchard, 1961 ; Riggs et al.,
1953 ; Yarbus, 1967 ). These images
would otherwise disappear because of the insensitivity of the
retina to steady states (Hartline, 1938 ; Hubel, 1988 ). It would make a lot
of sense for the evolution of mammals to maintain
this advantage, which allows vision of stationary objects.
Moreover, it seems that separate mechanisms evolved to control
eye movements specifically during fixation, since, during fixational
viewing, the scatter of the eye is usually larger than
the minimal possible scatter (Barlow, 1952 ). There are, in
fact, indications that the brainstem oculomotor circuits
control the FeyeM (Coakley, 1983 ; Eizenman et al., 1985 ; Shakhnovich, 1977 ; Spauschus et
al., 1999 ). Such a control
could evolve to optimize the processing of the
retinal output, using a servo-like sensory-motor closed-loop
operation, of the type proposed by Wiener's cybernetic
theory (Wiener, 1949 ).Can the Eye Function as a Still Camera? Whatever their evolutionary origins are, the existence of the FeyeM does not allow a high-resolution camera-like operation of the eye, much as high-resolution stills cannot be obtained from a camera held by a trembling hand. The amount of smearing depends on hand velocity, the shutter opening time, and the time constant of the decay of the photographic film. Similarly, retinal smearing would depend on eye movement velocity, the duration of the fixational pause, and retinal memory (Barlow, 1952 ). Luckily enough, the
retina has usually only a short memory trace. However,
even during periods similar to retinal time constants
(30–200 ms; Barlow, 1952 ; Nirenberg and Meister,
1997 ; Sakuranaga et
al., 1987 ), the eye would
travel a distance of a few to few tens of foveal
photoreceptors (Riggs and Ratliff, 1954 ). Note that, even
if the visual system could employ some kind of an
''internal shutter'' and could capture brief snapshots
from the retinal output, smearing should still occur; this
is because, at any given moment, activity of retinal
ganglion cells contains traces of previous activations
(Barlow, 1952 ). These retinal traces
would smear the image if the readout circuits would assume
only spatial coding, namely, that the spatial map of
retinal activity (at a given moment) represents the
external image, regardless of its temporal pattern. The task
presented to such a readout circuit is demonstrated
in Figure
6. In this figure, the spatial map of retinal activity,
sampled at three different brief snapshots, is estimated,
assuming retinal time constant of 100 ms and real traces of eye
movements.
Although the spatial map of retinal activity is smeared, the perceived visual image is not. Moreover, details of the visual image can be resolved with hyperacuity, i.e., with a precision that is much better than that offered by the retinal granularity. For example, human subjects can detect spatial offsets which are only a fraction of the diameter of a photoreceptor (Westheimer, 1976 ). This ability is
usually demonstrated by the Vernier stimulus, in which two
lines are misaligned by a few arcseconds. Human subjects
can detect Vernier offsets of 3 , whereas the smallest
photoreceptors have a diameter of about 20 . How can this be achieved with
a trembling eye?The only way in which a camera-like mechanism could obtain high-resolution visual images with a constantly moving eye is with external flashes, similar to stroboscopic illumination. This way, if the interval between flashes is large enough compared with retinal time constants, the internal image would not be smeared (although it would be constantly moving). Unfortunately, the world is usually not flashing, and, thus, the visual system has to work differently. One possibility is that the visual image is acquired at the retina with low resolution using camera-like spatial coding, and a high-resolution perception is obtained by cortical interpolation (Barlow, 1979 ; Crick et al., 1981 ; Fahle and Poggio, 1981 ). However, this
hypothesis, which emerged to explain hyperacuity of moving
stimuli assuming a still eye, is not consistent with retinal
data (Shapley and Victor, 1986 ) and does not
seem to hold for FeyeM (see ''Alternative Models''
below).How It Might Work The continuous movement of the eye puts several constraints on the way that the visual information is encoded. The main constraint is demonstrated by the schematic case depicted in Figure 7A, in which two ganglion cells are excited by a single spatial offset. During a rightward eye movement, the RFs of the two cells move from one location (solid circles) at time t to another location (broken circles) at time t + t. During this movement, a burst
of spikes is triggered in each of the ganglion cells
at the moment its RF crosses the stimulus edge. The durations
of the bursts are determined by the retinal time
constants. If the readout circuit relies only on spatial
coding and only on the output of these two cells, then the
spatial offset will not be sensed. This is because, with
spatial coding, the information is assumed to be coded
by the identity of the activated cells. However, the
fact that these two neurons fired would only mean that
each of them faced a luminance change; no information about the
existence, direction, or magnitude of the spatial offset is
contained in the spatial code. Neither is this information
encoded by the firing rates of these neurons. The
information about the spatial offset is contained solely in the
temporal dimension—the onset of one burst is delayed relative
to the other. The duration of the delay represents a
certain amount of spatial offset. Thus, to represent the
spatial offset, the readout system must decode the temporal
delay.
Interestingly, the necessity of temporal decoding mechanisms is widely accepted in the case of moving stimuli (Barlow, 1979 ; Burr and Ross, 1986 ; Fahle and Poggio, 1981 ) but not in the case
of stationary stimuli. We argue that, in principle, there is
no difference between the processing of stationary and
moving stimuli—retinal images are always moving (Steinman and
Levinson, 1990 ). Whether
movements of the retinal image are imposed by external
movements or by eye movements, the basic task introduced to the
brain is similar—the extraction of spatial details from
moving retinal images. Indeed, in awake behaving monkeys,
cortical neurons in V1 respond similarly to a moving stimuli,
whether the movement is induced by the external
stimulus or by the eye (Snodderly et al., 2001 ).While examining the effect of FeyeM on contrast sensitivity, Packer and Williams concluded that the visual system ''seems to be remarkably resistant to blurring by the small eye movements that occur during normal fixation'' (Packer and Williams, 1992 ). As you will
see below, we propose that vision is not resistant
to and does not correct for but rather
utilizes the small FeyeM. Previous attempts to assign
perceptual roles to fixational eye movements (by so-called
''dynamic theories'') were not successful (Steinman and Levinson, 1990 ). As
far as we can judge, the failure of previous dynamic
theories was mainly due to two shortcomings. First, most of
these models did not assume temporal encoding by the eye
movements but, rather, spatial averaging or spatiotemporal
filtering, both of which necessarily induce loss of
information. Second, these models did not provide a conceivable
mechanism to restore the lost information (see ''Comparison
with Previous Dynamic Models'' below). Our proposal continues
the line of thought presented by these previous dynamic
theories but presents a new view of retinal encoding and
central decoding.A New Dynamic Theory for Vision Our dynamic theory postulates that a temporal encoding-decoding scheme is utilized for processing fine spatial details in relative coordinates, while a spatial encoding-decoding scheme is utilized for processing coarse spatial details in absolute coordinates. Temporal Encoding The FeyeM induce a simple spatial-to-temporal transformation, similar to that induced by fingers scanning a surface or rodents' whiskers scanning the environment. The basic encoding scheme, along a single axis, i.e., along the eye movement path, is demonstrated in Figure 7. When the RF of a ganglion cell crosses an illumination contrast, a burst is triggered ( Figure 7, retinal output ''1''). The onset of the burst will occur at the time in which the illumination level within the RF crosses the cell's firing threshold (upward or downward for ON or OFF cells, respectively). If the illumination contrast is located further along the movement path, the onset of the burst will be delayed ( Figure 7, retinal output ''2''). Thus, the relative locations of two illumination contrasts, i.e., spatial offsets within the visual field, would be encoded by temporal delays between activation onsets of retinal ganglion cells (see Bryngdahl, 1961 ; Darian-Smith and
Oke, 1980 ). In Figure
7A, the spatial offset ( x) is translated, by a rightward eye
movement, to a temporal delay [ t = x/V(t), where V(t) is
the eye velocity] between the activation of spatially
aligned RFs. The accuracy of this coding is not limited
by the spatial receptor granularity, because the intercone gaps
are scanned during eye movements. The factors that limit coding
accuracy here are the temporal accuracy of spike
generation and conduction mechanisms and eye velocity. Since
the temporal accuracy of the above mechanisms is
usually constant, spatial resolution depends mainly on eye
velocity. For example, with eye velocities between 10' to
100'/s (natural FeyeM velocities) and a spatial offset of
3 , t would be between 5
to 0.5 ms, respectively. These temporal intervals are well
within the range of intervals that can be reliably
detected by a variety of neuronal circuits (Ahissar, 1998 ; Carr, 1993 ). Still, if the visual
system can control the velocity of FeyeM, it can optimize
the temporal delays to meet the limitations of its
actual readout circuits and even to enable the detection of
very small spatial offsets (<1 , see Klein and Levi, 1985 ).An additional advantage of this encoding is its resistance to optical blurring. This is because optical blurring affects the absolute location of light distribution across the retina but not the relative distances between image details (Figure 7B). The temporal code is a differential code, since it is based on the difference between activation times of neighboring ganglion cells. Therefore, it is almost not affected by optical blurring. The only effect optical blurring has on this temporal code is increasing the temporal noise by reducing local contrasts. However, if the light-to-firing transfer function is sharp enough, this temporal noise can be very small. In general, this differential temporal code makes the detection of spatial offsets, though not their absolute localization, immune to various types of common-mode noise, that is, noise that affects neighboring receptors similarly. In fact, the retinal temporal encoding proposed here is an implementation of the idea of ''differential amplifier'' suggested by Westheimer to explain hyperacuity (Westheimer, 1990 ).Naturally, the differential nature of temporal encoding entails an inability to resolve absolute location. Interestingly, this is also the case with hyperacuity: it is a differential acuity and not an absolute acuity (Westheimer, 1990 ). If, for
example, the two lines composing a Vernier are presented each
to a different eye, the acuity drops to the ''normal''
acuity levels (McKee and Levi, 1987 ). The same happens when
lines are not presented simultaneously, and, therefore, the
comparison is between the location of one of the lines
with the memory of the other (McKee et al., 1990 ). All is
consistent with hyperacuity being mediated by the
differential temporal encoding and normal acuity, which is
associated with absolute localization, mediated mainly by
spatial encoding. Another limitation of the temporal encoding
is that it takes time. With temporal encoding, hyperacuity
can be obtained only after the relevant location has
been scanned at the right direction with the proper velocity.
Moreover, decoding of this information might even require a few
repetitions of this scanning movement (e.g., Ahissar, 1998 ). This limitation implies
that accurate vision should require continuous fixation. Common
experience and controlled studies indicate that visual
acuity indeed improves with longer fixations (Keesey, 1960 ; Morgan et al., 1983 ; Packer and Williams, 1992
; Riggs et al.,
1953 ).Reading the Temporal Code As demonstrated in Figure 7, the temporal interval ( t) encoding the spatial offset is
defined as the interval between the onsets of the
two bursts. Thus, to read this code, the visual system
has to identify the onset of each burst and measure the
interval between them. While there are probably several
possible solutions to this task, one seems especially
attractive to us. From electronic solutions to similar
computational tasks (Gardner, 1979 ) and from our
findings in the vibrissal system (Ahissar et al., 1997, 2000 , and see above), we know
that such temporal measurements can be achieved via
predictive phase locking between the sensory input and
local oscillators. The local oscillators would provide an
internal source of timing, somewhat like a ''processing
clock,'' and the phase locking with the FeyeM would
synchronize this processing clock with the input signals. This
decoding scheme requires the existence of independent
oscillators in the visual cortex, which are tuned to
frequencies similar to those of the FeyeM and can lock
their firing phases to periodic inputs and track changes
of the instantaneous input frequency (Ahissar, 1998 ).Interestingly, the visual system is equipped with exactly such oscillators. The intrinsic oscillations in the visual cortex display oscillating frequencies that match those of the FeyeM (Eckhorn, 1994 ; Gray et al.,
1989 ; Gray and
McCormick, 1996 ). In particular, similar
to the FeyeM, cortical oscillations tend to oscillate within
the
(around 10 Hz) and
(40–100 Hz) ranges. Figure
5 demonstrates the matching of frequency ranges. The
spectral densities of human eye position (Figure
5C), eye velocity (Figure
5A), and stimulus-driven oscillations of local field
potentials in the monkey visual cortex (Figure
5B) are strikingly similar, all emphasizing the and modes. Note that the
spectral density of cortical oscillations is more similar to
that of eye velocity, which emphasizes high frequencies, than
to that of eye position. This might imply that the
spectral density of the retinal output is more correlated
with that of eye velocity rather than eye position. Single-cell
cortical oscillators were characterized so far only in cats.
The spectral density of these oscillations, as well as of
those of multiunits and local field potentials, preserve
the / bimodal distribution,
albeit the
frequency mode in cats appears at a lower frequency
than in monkeys, around 40 Hz (Figure
5D). This difference agrees with the observation that
cats' eye tremor frequencies are limited to about 40
Hz (Pritchard and Heron, 1960 ).The frequencies of the visual cortical oscillations can be locally controlled (Gray and McCormick, 1996 ) or modulated
by external stimuli (Eckhorn et al., 1993 ; Gray and Viana Di Prisco,
1997 ), as it is
the case in the somatosensory system. This is a basic
requirement of a predictive phase-locking mechanism. Such a
local control enables phase locking between the local
oscillators and the FeyeM. This can be obtained by
thalamocortical loops, while they function as neuronal
phase-locked loops (NPLLs, see ''Temporal Encoding-Decoding in
the Tactile System'' above). Phase locking is obtained by
virtue of a negative feedback loop, and decoding is achieved by
comparing the predicted timing, i.e., the timing of the
local oscillators, with the actual input timing, i.e., that of
retinal output bursts. The decoding of the local details
of an image would be based on a population of such NPLLs,
whose individual working ranges vary in both spatial and
temporal dimensions and together cover the entire visual
field and the entire spectrum of FeyeM frequencies
(Ahissar, 1998 ).Let us now come back to the question of smearing. Retinal smearing due to FeyeM is caused by the fact that each ganglion cell generates a burst of spikes for each activation rather than a single spike (e.g., Figure 7A). The duration of this burst is determined by the retinal time constants relevant for that cell. The temporal coding scheme is able to overcome this smearing only if the readout circuit is able to measure the delay between the onsets of these bursts. Thus, to decode this temporal delay, the readout circuits have to identify the beginning of each burst and to treat each burst as a single encoding event. Thalamocortical NPLLs do exactly this—they chunk the afferent information stream according to FeyeM cycles. For each FeyeM cycle, the NPLLs would translate the retinal temporal code ( t) into a spike count code in
which cortical spike counts represent the relative spatial
locations of illumination contrasts in the visual image.
These spike counts would be the total number of spikes
generated within a single ''processing cycle'' (single FeyeM
cycle). Thus, fine spatial details along a scanning trajectory
can be extracted by comparing spike counts of adjacent
NPLLs at each processing cycle. For example, decoding the
Vernier offset of Figure
7 can be accomplished by comparing the spike counts of
two NPLLs driven by two adjacent channels. The decoding
process is similar to the one suggested for the
vibrissal system (see Figure
2) and involves a direct interaction of ongoing
(''predictive'') cortical activity with the incoming sensory
signals (Arieli et al., 1996 ; Tsodyks et al., 1999 ).Dimensional Reduction One interesting outcome of the active acquisition process induced by the FeyeM can be called dimensional reduction of the effective stimuli for cortical visual neurons. This dimensional reduction is demonstrated in Figure 8. The figure describes the effect of FeyeM on responses of cortical simple cells, assuming the afferent scheme proposed by Hubel and Wiesel (the scheme and supporting evidence are reviewed in Hubel, 1996 ). According to this
scheme, cortical simple cells receive inputs from elongated
arrays of thalamic neurons, and thalamic neurons ensure
transmission of retinal signals by conducting them in parallel
(Figure
8). Note that excitatory fields of RFs of cortical
simple cells (sRFs) at the fovea can be as narrow as a
single retinal cone (Dow et al., 1981 ). In awake fixating
animal, external image elements move across the retina along a
trajectory which is a mirror image of the FeyeM
trajectory. Thus, during fixation, a single external dot passes
through a series of oriented sRFs (some of them are
plotted in Figure
8, left). According to available data, this should
induce responses in cortical simple cells because (1) simple
cells usually exhibit an OR-like response fashion, in which any
spot flashed within their excitatory zone activates the
cell (Gur and Snodderly, 1987 ; Hirsch et al., 1995 ; Hubel and Wiesel, 1962 ), and, (2) in the
anesthetized cat, simple cells are effectively activated by
illuminated spots that are swept along the long axis of their
RF (A. Engel, S. Haidarliu, M. Brecht, and E.A., unpublished
data). The retinal location and orientation of each sRF would
determine its response pattern for each FeyeM trajectory ( Figure
8, right).
Thus, the same anatomy underlies both orientation tuning for moving bars when the eyes are paralyzed and trajectory tuning for stationary dots in the awake fixating animal. We refer to this as ''dimensional reduction'' that is induced by the FeyeM: a single dot, which is a poor stimulus for cortical simple cells in paralyzed animals, becomes an effective stimulus during FeyeM, when the RF of a simple cell ''scans'' the stationary dot along the long axis of its RF. Similarly, a stationary bar becomes an effective stimulus when scanned by the RF of a complex cell. Indeed, V1 neurons with large RFs are effectively activated when their RF scans a stationary bar during FeyeM (Martinez-Conde et al., 2000 ; Snodderly et al., 2001 ). Thus, we might
say that stimuli that are most effective for LGN and simple
cells in paralyzed animals are optimal for simple
and complex cells, respectively, in freely viewing animals.
Consequently, simple and complex cells might function as
trajectory and edge detectors, respectively, during free
viewing.Visual Stability When considering FeyeM, the following puzzle is frequently raised: if the FeyeM move the retinal image across a significant number of photoreceptors, why don't we perceive a drifting and jittering world? This puzzle bears the assumption that visual perception of absolute target position is sensitive to changes smaller than the scatter of the FeyeM; otherwise, the FeyeM could not cause a perception of movement. This is because FeyeM induce only absolute position changes in the entire visual field; these movements cannot be measured against a reference point. However, the above assumption is probably not correct. Errors in spatial localization without a simultaneously presented visual reference, i.e., errors in absolute spatial localization, are larger than the scatter of the eye (a few arcminutes), even in the fovea where cone spacing allows much higher accuracy. In fact, the main reason for foveal mislocalization of absolute position appears to be the FeyeM (Matin et al., 1981 ; White et al., 1992 ). Thus, it is
very well probable that if the entire world ''shifts
around'' by a few arcminutes we will not be aware of it
at all.Thus, it seems that the drifting world puzzle can be explained by the dual processing scheme proposed here: fine image analysis is based on temporal coding, in relative spatial coordinates, and global image analysis is based on spatial coding, in absolute coordinates. It is not impossible that these different coding schemes underlie, in general, the processing of ''what'' and ''where'' in the visual system (Goodale, 1993 ; Ungerleider and Haxby,
1994 ). The
visual system could sacrifice absolute coordinates for
the sake of high-resolution analysis of features but must
work in absolute coordinates when dealing with sensory-motor
coordination, such as during reaching. This is consistent with
the finding that the accuracy of visual sensory-motor control
is worse than the scatter of the eye (van Opstal and van
Gisbergen, 1989 ; White et al.,
1992 ). Overall,
this scheme is in line with the notion that the
resolution in which retinal inputs are associated with unique
''local signs'' (Lotze, 1885 ) is that of the
sensory-motor where system and is poorer than that
employed by the sensory what system (see Morgan et al.,
1990 ).In neuronal terms, the dual processing scheme suggests that the analysis of what is based on temporal coding by small RF cells, whereas that of where is based on spatial coding by larger RF cells. The RF distinction is consistent with the traditional association of what and where processing with the parvo- and magnocellular systems, respectively (Livingstone and Hubel, 1988 ). However, the
coding distinction seems to oppose traditional view. According
to the traditional view, since parvocellular neurons exhibit
poorer temporal locking to external stimuli, they probably do
not process temporally encoded information, a task which is
traditionally assigned to the better-locking magnocellular
neurons. However, as with the distinction between lemniscal and
paralemniscal neurons in the vibrissal system, we believe that
fixed temporal locking signals the opposite: the magnocellular
neurons, which accurately preserve input timing, probably do
not process the temporally encoded information but only
relay this information downstream. This information is
likely to be crucial for sensory-motor coordination, such as
reaching or orienting, which depends strongly on timing. In
contrast, the ''unreliable'' temporal locking of parvocellular
neurons might be an indication for a temporal-to-rate
transformation process, a process that is essential for
translating the FeyeM-dependent coding into a more ''abstract''
code, such as the spike count code.Comparison with Previous Dynamic Theories Several models have been proposed for the potential role of the FeyeM in vision since their discovery (Adler and Fliegelman, 1934 ; for review, see Steinman
and Levinson, 1990 ). Most of
these models, which focused on the utilization of the
frequency FeyeM
(tremor), assumed integration of the temporally encoded outputs
of the retina (e.g., Arend, 1973 ; Marshal and Talbot, 1942
). However, simple
integration would loose the fine temporal information, embedded
in the retinal output—information that, as we showed here, has
a hyperacuity resolution. In contrast, our model (1) relies on
the entire spectrum of the FeyeM and (2) does not assume
integration. Our model suggests, instead, that the fine
temporal structure of the retinal output carries the
information about the fine spatial details of the image.
Furthermore, we propose that an active process, which is based
on internal low-level (automatic) timing expectations, performs
the decoding of the fine temporal details. Arend (1973 ) postulated a
mechanism that discriminates between eye and object
movement already at early processing stages. We suggest
that the only discrimination done at early visual
stages is between local and global motion, whatever the
global source is.Aliasing According to our model, vision is a sampling process in time. Thus, retinal motion is always an apparent motion, whose sampling rate, which is the frequency of FeyeM, is not constant. One of the clear signs of a sampling process is a phenomenon called ''aliasing.'' Any continuous signal can be fully reconstructed after sampling if the sampling frequency is higher than twice the maximal frequency contained in the signal. However, if the sampling frequency is lower, part of the input information is lost, and aliasing occurs: high input frequencies are aliased to a lower frequency range. Some well-known aliasing effects are caused by the constant-frequency sampling process used in movies or that induced by neon light vision at night. For example, car or wagon wheels can be seen rolling in the opposite direction in these conditions. This would happen when the sampling interval (1/frequency) is longer than the time required for one spoke to pass half of the interspoke interval but shorter than the time required for passing the entire interspoke interval. In this case, the brain interprets the apparent motion signals as indicating motion in the opposite direction (Shechter et al., 1988 ). Under
certain conditions, aliasing occurs also with continuous-light
vision (Purves et al., 1996 ). However,
in most cases, the visual system succeeds in avoiding
aliasing. One of the major factors helping to avoid
aliasing is probably the pattern of eye movements: unlike the
stereotypic whisker movements in rodents or the constant
frequency in movies, eye movements almost never exhibit a
repetitive scanning along a fixed linear section and with
a constant frequency. While the quasirandomized nature of
eye movements makes the decoding process much harder than
the one required for a simple periodic scanning, it probably
provides an enormous advantage by enabling a reliable and
unambiguous reconstruction of external movements.Alternative Models If, contrary to our hypothesis, the FeyeM are not utilized for vision, then the visual system should overcome their effect. Only a few studies and theories directly addressed this issue. Packer and Williams (1992 ) demonstrated
that visual acuity is impaired during the first ~200 ms of
fixation and gradually improves with longer fixations. One
of their conclusions is cited in our Figure
6B. To explain how blurring due to FeyeM is overcome,
they suggest that the visual system computes a moving average
over its input, detects those periods with high contrasts
(corresponding, according to their model, to periods of
relatively stable eyes, e.g., Figure
6D), and performs spatial analysis only during those
periods. However, if the visual system can ignore low-contrast
periods, why does acuity deteriorate following stimulus onset?
According to this model, the visual system should always
base its processing on the high contrast produced by
the stimulus onset and ignore the consequent low-contrast
periods when the response is influenced by FeyeM. Furthermore,
since the FeyeM are not correlated between the eyes (see, for
example, Figure
4C), two separate moving-window processes, one for each
eye, would operate in early visual stages and would provide
their outputs in uncorrelated times, posing significant
computational difficulties for binocular vision. Finally,
consider the paradox introduced here: Packer and Williams
suggest that visual acuity is best in conditions in which the
retinal output is the least informative (since its
main driving force, luminance transitions, are largely eliminated).
Altogether, this process would be inefficient, since the system
would have to wait for those rare periods of
complete motionless or compromise for periods with small
movements which still cause significant blurring (Figure
6) and ignore all the accurate information that is
continuously available during ongoing FeyeM. In fact, as
mentioned above, during fixational pauses, the scatter of the
eye is usually larger than the minimal possible scatter
(Barlow, 1952 ), which is in favor
of an active sampling mechanism rather than a mechanism
that relies on stable eyes.We could not find other models that explicitly addressed the problem of blurring by FeyeM. However, models that offer general solutions for unblurring could, in principle, apply to FeyeM as well. Anderson and Van-Essen (1987 ) have suggested
a universal error correction neural circuit which they
called ''shifter circuits.'' These circuits could correct
blurring due to external or retinal motion, by shifting and
redirecting the inputs according to some global command that
predicts the blurring source. In the case of FeyeM, such
circuits could produce a stable cortical image if
the direction and speed of the eye were available to the
cortex before or at least in parallel to the arrival
of the retinal signals. However, neither such a command
signal nor shifter circuits has been found so far in the
visual system. On the contrary, RFs in the primary visual
cortex were found to be locked to the retinal fields
during FeyeM (Gur and Snodderly, 1997 ). In any case, even
if they existed in higher stages, shifter circuits could
not be sufficient for ''unblurring'' the image, since
even the briefest retinal snapshot is already blurred due
to retinal memory (Figure
6). The best such spatial shifter circuits could do
is to align the centers of the consecutive blurred
images. What is required for unblurring the image is some sort
of ''temporal shifter circuits,'' and, in a way, this is what
the thalamocortical circuits proposed by us
accomplish.Since retinal images are always moving, visual perception of both stationary and moving objects face similar challenges and thus might utilize similar mechanisms. Based on studies of moving stimuli, Barlow (1979 ), Burr et al. (1986 ), Fahle and Poggio (1981
), and others have
suggested that the visual system achieves hyperacuity by
interpolation. Indeed, it has been shown that the visual
cortex contains enough neurons to interpolate the retinal
input down to a resolution of 3 , provided that the basic representational
unit is a single neuron (Crick et al., 1981 ). However, as mentioned by
Wilson (1986 ), the
visual cortex probably does not have enough neurons to
support acuity of <1 , which is attainable under
appropriate conditions (Klein and Levi, 1985 ). Moreover, such
interpolation can work only with constant-speed movements
(Crick et al., 1981 ) and probably
only when the direction of movement is known. FeyeM's speed is
not constant, and it is not at all clear where in
the brain the information about its direction is
extracted.Integration of Models In principle, even if the visual cortex would be able to perform the proper interpolation, a mechanism that acquires the image at low resolution and then ''up-samples'' it should be less accurate and much less efficient than a mechanism that acquires the image already with a high resolution. However, it seems that these two mechanisms might be operating in series in the visual system. The visual system contains a large number of spatiotemporal channels suitable for spatiotemporal integration (Burr and Ross, 1986 ). These
spatiotemporal channels exhibit a wide distribution of
spatial frequencies but a narrow distribution of temporal
frequencies: they are mostly tuned to temporal frequencies
within the
frequency range (around 10 Hz; Burr and Ross, 1986 ). This raises the
following interesting hypothesis. Since the visual cortex
cannot contain enough hard-wired channels to cover all possible
spatial and temporal variations of FeyeM, some of these
variations must be treated online. An online adjustment of
a temporal tuning of a filter requires retuning of its
band-pass range according to the input frequency. This is
exactly what is accomplished by NPLLs—by forcing its local
oscillator to follow the input frequency, a PLL circuit
implements an adaptive band-pass filter that follows the
varying input (Gardner, 1979 ). This process, in which
the temporal processing of the current input is
based on the temporal properties of the past input
cycles, can in principle be regarded as temporal extrapolation,
whose existence is implied by several psychophysical studies
(e.g., Nijhawan, 1997 ). On the other
hand, the interpolation power of cortical neurons can be
used to smooth the spatial representation (coded by spike
counts) of the NPLLs' outputs. We thus postulate an integrated
model in which early processing of the visual image includes
two stages in series: first, the temporal code is decoded
and removed, and then the spatial details are processed.
This scheme resembles the temporal-then-spatial filtering
scheme suggested by Morgan and Watt (1983 ), only that in our scheme
the temporal filter is not a passive filter but an
active, retunable one. The processing of spatial details,
performed on the output of the temporal decoders, is probably
conducted in parallel by a number of spatial mechanisms, each
tuned for both orientation and spatial frequency (Wilson, 1986,
1991 ) . Interestingly,
the entire temporal encoding-decoding stage (i.e., encoding by
FeyeM and decoding by NPLLs) can probably be bypassed, in the
laboratory, by using a paralyzed experimental animal or by
applying high-intensity brief flashed stimuli, which eliminate
FeyeM effects (Hadani et al., 1984 ). In these conditions,
cortical spatial mechanisms can probably restore hyperacuity
based on spatial cues alone. (In some conditions, the decoding
of the high-intensity flashed stimuli can still be based
on a differential temporal code. For example, following a
high-intensity brief presentation, the receptors that are
''marked'' by the afterimage will not respond when the
eye, which continues to move due to FeyeM, crosses
illumination contrasts that activate their neighbors. The times
of ''silence'' and thus also of the following activity
onset will have the same temporal delays that represent the
spatial offset imprinted by the brief stimulus.) However,
during natural viewing, when images are not flashed onto the
retina but rather are continuously scanned, the retinal
output should first be decoded, by a mechanism that
is temporally locked to the FeyeM, before it can be
interpolated. Note that this order is the logical order of
processing and does not necessarily entail a clear temporal
or spatial separation between the two processes.Limitations and Predictions We hope that by now we have convinced the reader that, during normal vision, the constraints imposed by the physiology of the eye, the nature of the visual world, and perceptual limits reveal a need for computation based on temporal coding. The dynamic model outlined here is consistent with a large body of physiological, neurophysiological, and psychophysical data. However, this dynamic process is not the only one of the processes affecting and limiting performance. The spatial mechanisms, which as we suggest process the output of the temporal mechanisms, add additional limitations of their own (see Crick et al., 1981 ; Levi, 1999 ; Swindale and Cynader,
1986 ; Wilson, 1986 ).Still, several clear predictions can be derived from the dynamic model. One is that visual perception should be directly related to the FeyeM. For example, to detect Vernier offsets, FeyeM should have a movement component along the axis of the Vernier offset. FeyeM velocities should also have direct effect on perception. For example, to detect very small offsets (of a few arcseconds), eye velocity should be relatively slow (few to a few tens of arcminutes per second). Moreover, if the visual system indeed employs an active control of eye velocity, then eye velocity should be reduced as the spatial frequency increases. Another set of predictions can be derived from the proposed decoding mechanism. For example, response latencies and magnitudes, in thalamus and cortex, should show inverse dependencies on the temporal frequency of the stimulus, as is the case in the somatosensory paralemniscal system of the rat. Summary and Conclusions We propose a novel encoding-decoding scheme for the tactile and visual systems. In this scheme, spatial encoding is induced by the spatial arrangements of the receptors, and temporal encoding is induced by the movements of the sensory organs. The temporal cues provide a higher fidelity; however, their coding is a differential one providing only relative spatial information, whereas the spatial cues provide spatial information in absolute coordinates (relative to head position and gaze). The decoding of the temporal information is slower and requires phase locking to the movements of the sensory organs. In the rat somatosensory system, temporal and spatial coding seem to be used for encoding object location in horizontal and vertical axes, respectively. In addition, temporal and spatial coding are probably used for fine and coarse texture analysis, respectively. In the visual systems, temporal coding might be used for fine feature analysis (what) and spatial coding for coarse feature analysis and for absolute localization (where).
We wish to thank S. Barash, M. Gur, B. Mel, M. Snodderly, D. Sparks, M. Szwed, and M. Tsodyks for their insightful comments on the manuscript; and M. Ahissar, G. Arieli, and R. Malach for enlightening discussions. This work was supported by the Israel Science Foundation, Israel, Israel-USA binational Foundation, Israel, the MINERVA Foundation, Germany, and the Carl Dominic Center for Brain Research, Israel.
Adler F.H. and Fliegelman M. (1934) Influence of fixation on the visual acuity. Arch. Ophthalmol., 12:475-483. [Medline] Ahissar, E. (1995). Conversion from temporal-coding to rate-coding by neuronal phase-locked loops. Technical Report GC-EA/95–4 (Rehovot, Israel: The Weizmann Institute of Science). Ahissar E. (1998) Temporal-code to rate-code conversion by neuronal phase-locked loops. Neural Comput., 10:597-650. [Medline] Ahissar E. and Vaadia E. (1990) Oscillatory activity of single units in a somatosensory cortex of an awake monkey and their possible role in texture analysis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 87:8935-8939. [Medline] Ahissar E. and Zacksenhouse M. (2001) Temporal and spatial coding in the rat vibrissal system. Prog. Brain Res., 130:75-88. [Medline] Ahissar E., Haidarliu S. and Zacksenhouse M. (1997) Decoding temporally encoded sensory input by cortical oscillations and thalamic phase comparators. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 94:11633-11638. [Medline] Ahissar E., Sosnik R. and Haidarliu S. (2000) Transformation from temporal to rate coding in a somatosensory thalamocortical pathway. Nature, 406:302-306. [Medline] Ahissar E., Sosnik R., Bagdasarian K. and Haidarliu S. (2001) Temporal frequency of whisker movement. II. Laminar organization of cortical representations. J. Neurophysiol., 86:354-367. [Medline] Anderson C.H. and Van Essen D.C. (1987) Shifter circuits: A computational strategy for dynamic aspects of visual processing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 84:6297-6301. [Medline] Arend L.E. (1973) Spatial differential and integral operations in human vision: Implications of stabilized retinal image fading. Psychol. Rev., 80:374-395. [Medline] Arieli A., Sterkin A., Grinvald A. and Aertsen A. (1996) The dynamics of on-going activity accounts for the large variability in cortical evoked responses. Science, 273:1868-1871. [Medline] Armstrong-James M. and Fox K. (1987) Spatiotemporal convergence and divergence in the rat S1 ''barrel'' cortex. J. Comp. Neurol., 263:265-281. [Medline] Armstrong-James M., Fox K. and Das-Gupta A. (1992) Flow of excitation within rat barrel cortex on striking a single vibrissa. J. Neurophysiol., 68:1345-1358. [Medline] Barlow H.B. (1952) Eye movements during fixation. J. Physiol., 116:290-306. Barlow H.B. (1979) Reconstructing the visual image in space and time. Nature, 279:189-190. [Medline] Bengi H. and Thomas J.G. (1968) Three electronic methods for recording ocular tremor. Med. Biol. Eng., 6:171-179. [Medline] Bengi H. and Thomas J.G. (1972) Studies on human ocular tremor. In: Kenedi R.M. (Ed.) Prospectives in biomedical engineering. London: Macmillen Bernardo K.L., McCasland J.S., Woolsey T.A. and Strominger R.N. (1990) Local intra- and interlaminar connections in mouse barrel cortex. J. Comp. Neurol., 291:231-255. [Medline] Bourassa J., Pinault D. and Deschenes M. (1995) Corticothalamic projections from the cortical barrel field to the somatosensory thalamus in rats: a single-fibre study using biocytin as an anterograde tracer. Eur. J. Neurosci., 7:19-30. [Medline] Brecht M., Preilowski B. and Merzenich M.M. (1997) Functional architecture of the mystacial vibrissae. Behav. Brain Res., 84:81-97. [Medline] Brumberg J.C., Pinto D.J. and Simons D.J. (1999) Cortical columnar processing in the rat whisker-to-barrel system. J. Neurophysiol., 82:1808-1817. [Medline] Bryngdahl O. (1961) Effect of retinal image motion on visual acuity. Optica Acta, 8:1-16. Buonomano D.V. and Merzenich M.M. (1995) Temporal information transformed into a spatial code by a neural network with realistic properties. Science, 267:1028-1030. [Medline] Burr D. and Ross J. (1986) Visual processing of motion. Trends Neurosci., 9:304-307. [Medline] Burr D.C., Ross J. and Morrone M.C. (1986) Seeing objects in motion. Proc. R Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci., 227:249-265. [Medline] Byford G.H. and Stuart H.F. (1961) An apparatus for the measurement of small eye movements. J. Physiol., 159:2P-3P. Carpenter R.H.S. Movements of the Eyes. (1988) (Second Edition Edition)London: Pion Carr C.E. (1993) Processing of temporal information in the brain. Ann. Rev. Neurosci., 16:223-243. Carvell G.E. and Simons D.J. (1990) Biometric analyses of vibrissal tactile discrimination in the rat. J. Neurosci., 10:2638-2648. [Medline] Carvell G.E. and Simons D.J. (1995) Task- and subject-related differences in sensorimotor behavior during active touch. Somatosens. Mot. Res., 12:1-9. [Medline] Chmielowska J., Carvell G.E. and Simons D.J. (1989) Spatial organization of thalamocortical and corticothalamic projection systems in the rat SmI barrel cortex. J. Comp. Neurol., 285:325-338. [Medline] Coakley D. Minute Eye Movement and Brain Stem Function. (1983) Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Coppola D. and Purves D. (1996) The extraordinarily rapid disappearance of entoptic images Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 93:8001-8004. Crick F.H.C., Marr D.C. and Poggio T. (1981) An information-processing approach to understanding the visual cortex. In: Schmitt F.O. (Ed.) The Organization of the Cerebral Cortex. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press Darian-Smith I. and Oke L.E. (1980) Peripheral neural representation of the spatial frequency of a grating moving at different velocities across the monkey's finger pad. J. Physiol., 309:117-133. Diamond M.E. (1995) Somatosensory thalamus of the rat. In: Jones E.G. and Diamond I.T. (Eds.) Cerebral Cortex, Volume 11. New York: Plenum Press Diamond M.E., Armstrong-James M., Budway M.J. and Ebner F.F. (1992) Somatic sensory responses in the rostral sector of the posterior group (POm) and in the ventral posterior medial nucleus (VPM) of the rat thalamus: dependence on the barrel field cortex. J. Comp. Neurol., 319:66-84. [Medline] Diamond M.E., Armstrong-James M. and Ebner F.F. (1992) Somatic sensory responses in the rostral sector of the posterior group (POm) and in the ventral posterior medial nucleus (VPM) of the rat thalamus. J. Comp. Neurol., 318:462-476. [Medline] Ditchburn R.W. Eye-Movements and Visual Perception. (1973) Oxford: Clarendon press Dow B.M., Snyder A.Z., Vautin R.G. and Bauer R. (1981) Magnification factor and receptive field size in foveal striate cortex of the monkey. Exp. Brain Res., 44:213-228. [Medline] Dudai Y. The Neurobiology of Memory. (1989) New York: Oxford University Press Eckhorn R. (1994) Oscillatory and non-oscillatory synchronizations in the visual cortex and their possible roles in associations of visual features. Prog. Brain Res., 102:405-426. [Medline] Eckhorn R., Frien A., Bauer R., Woelbern T. and Kehr H. (1993) High frequency (60–90 Hz) oscillations in primary visual cortex of awake monkey. Neuroreport, 4:243-246. [Medline] Eizenman M., Hallett P.E. and Frecker R.C. (1985) Power spectra for ocular drift and tremor. Vision Res., 25:1635-1640. [Medline] Ermentrout G.B. and Kleinfeld D. (2001) Traveling electrical waves in cortex: insights from phase dynamics and speculation on a computational role. Neuron, 29:33-44. [Medline][Summary][Full Text] Fahle M. and Poggio T. (1981) Visual hyperacuity: spatiotemporal interpolation in human vision. Proc. R Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci., 213:451-477. [Medline] Fanselow E.E. and Nicolelis M.A.L. (1999) Behavioral modulation of tactile responses in the rat somatosensory system. J. Neurosci., 19:7603-7616. [Medline] Fee M.S., Mitra P.P. and Kleinfeld D. (1997) Central versus peripheral determinants of patterned spike activity in rat vibrissa cortex during whisking. J. Neurophysiol., 78:1144-1149. [Medline] Felleman D.J. and Van Essen D.C. (1991) Distributed hierarchical processing in the primate cerebral cortex. Cereb. Cortex, 1:1-47. [Medline] Fetz E.E. (1993) Cortical mechanisms controlling limb movement. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol., 3:932-939. [Medline] Findlay J.M. (1971) Frequency analysis of human involuntary eye movement. Kybernetik, 8:207-214. [Medline] Friedberg M.H., Lee S.M. and Ebner F.F. (1999) Modulation of receptive field properties of thalamic somatosensory neurons by the depth of anesthesia. J. Neurophysiol., 81:2243-2252. [Medline] Gardner F.M. Phaselock Techniques. (1979) New York: John Wiley & sons Georgopoulos A.P. (1986) On reaching. Annu. Rev. Neurosci., 9:147-170. [Medline] Ghazanfar A.A. and Nicolelis M.A. (1997) Nonlinear processing of tactile information in the thalamocortical loop. J. Neurophysiol., 78:506-510. [Medline] Ghazanfar A.A., Stambaugh C.R. and Nicolelis M.A. (2000) Encoding of tactile stimulus location by somatosensory thalamocortical ensembles. J. Neurosci., 20:3761-3775. [Medline] Goodale M.A. (1993) Visual pathways supporting perception and action in the primate cerebral cortex. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol., 3:578-585. [Medline] Gottlieb J.P. and Keller A. (1997) Intrinsic circuitry and physiological properties of pyramidal neurons in rat barrel cortex. Exp. Brain Res., 115:47-60. [Medline] Gray C.M. and McCormick D.A. (1996) Chattering cells: Superficial pyramidal neurons contributing to the generation of synchronous oscillations in the visual cortex. Science, 274:109-113. [Medline] Gray C.M. and Viana Di Prisco G. (1997) Stimulus-dependent neuronal oscillations and local synchronization in striate cortex of the alert cat. J. Neurosci., 17:3239-3253. [Medline] Gray C.M., König P., Engel A.K. and Singer W. (1989) Oscillatory responses in cat visual cortex exhibit inter-columnar synchronization which reflects global stimulus properties. Nature, 338:334-337. [Medline] Gur M. and Snodderly D.M. (1987) Studying striate cortex neurons in behaving monkeys: benefits of image stabilization. Vision Res., 27:2081-2087. [Medline] Gur M. and Snodderly D.M. (1997) Visual receptive fields of neurons in primary visual cortex (V1) move in space with the eye movements of fixation. Vision Res., 37:257-265. [Medline] Gustafson J.W. and Felbain-Keramidas S.L. (1977) Behavioral and neural approaches to the function of the mystacial vibrissae. Psychol. Bull., 84:477-488. [Medline] Hadani I., Meiri A.Z. and Guri M. (1984) The effect of exposure duration and luminance on the 3-dot hyperacuity task. Vision Res., 34:871-874. [Medline] Haidarliu S. and Ahissar E. (1997) Spatial organization of facial vibrissae and cortical barrels in the guinea pig and golden hamster. J. Comp. Neurol., 385:515-527. [Medline] Haidarliu S., Sosnik R. and Ahissar E. (1999) Simultaneous multi-site recordings and iontophoretic drug and dye applications along the trigeminal system of anesthetized rats. J. Neurosci. Meth., 94:27-40. Hartline H.K. (1938) The response of single optic nerve fibers of the vertebrate eye to illumination of the retina. Am. J. Physiol., 121:400-415. [Medline] Hirsch J.A., Alonso J.M. and Reid R.C. (1995) Visually evoked calcium action potentials in cat striate cortex. Nature, 378:612-616. [Medline] Hoogland P.V., Welker E. and Van der Loos H. (1987) Organization of the projections from barrel cortex to thalamus in mice studied with Phaseolus vulgaris-leucoagglutinin and HRP. Exp. Brain Res., 68:73-87. [Medline] Hoogland P.V., Welker E., Van der Loos H. and Wouterlood F.G. (1988) The organization and structure of the thalamic afferents from the barrel cortex in the mouse: a PHA-L study. In: Bentivoglio M. and Spreafico R. (Eds.) Cellular Thalamic Mechanisms. Amsterdam: Elsevier Hubel D.H. Eye, Brain and Vision. (1988) New York: Freeman Hubel D. (1996) A big step along the visual pathway. Nature, 380:197-198. [Medline] Hubel D.H. and Wiesel T.N. (1962) Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat visual cortex. J. Physiol., 160:106-154. Jeffress L.A. (1948) A place theory of sound localization. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol., 41:35-39. [Medline] Kaas J. and Ebner F. (1998) Intrathalamic connections: a new way to modulate cortical plasticity? Nat. Neurosci., 1:341-342. Keesey U.T. (1960) Effects of involuntary eye movements on visual acuity. JOSA, 50:769-774. Keller A. (1995) Synaptic organization of the Barrel cortex. In: Jones E.G. and Diamond I.T. (Eds.) Cerebral Cortex, Volume 11. New York: Plenum Press Kim U. and Ebner F.F. (1999) Barrels and septa: separate circuits in rat barrels field cortex. J. Comp. Neurol., 408:489-505. [Medline] Klein S.A. and Levi D.M. (1985) Hyperacuity thresholds of 1 sec: theoretical predictions and empirical validation. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, 2:1170-1190. [Medline] Kleinfeld D., Berg R.W. and O'Connor S.M. (1999) Anatomical loops and their electrical dynamics in relation to whisking by rat. Somatosens. Mot. Res., 16:69-88. [Medline] Koralek K.A., Jensen K.F. and Killackey H.P. (1988) Evidence for two complementary patterns of thalamic input to the rat somatosensory cortex. Brain Res., 463:346-351. [Medline] Lebedev M.A. and Nelson R.J. (1995) Rhythmically firing (20–50 Hz) neurons in monkey primary somatosensory cortex: Activity patterns during initiation of vibratory-cued hand movements. J. Comp. Neurosci., 2:313-334. Levi D.M. (1999) Progress and paradigm shifts in spatial vision over the 20 years of ECVP. Perception, 28:1443-1459. [Medline] Livingstone M. and Hubel D. (1988) Segregation of form, color, movement, and depth: anatomy, physiology, and perception. Science, 240:740-749. [Medline] Lotze H. Microcosmos. (1885) Edinburgh: T & T Clark Lu S.M. and Lin R.C. (1993) Thalamic afferents of the rat barrel cortex: a light- and electron-microscopic study using Phaseolus vulgaris leucoagglutinin as an anterograde tracer. Somatosens. Mot. Res., 10:1-16. [Medline] Marshal W.H. and Talbot S.A. (1942) Recent evidence for neural mechanisms in vision leading to a general theory of sensory acuity. Biol. Symp., 7:117-164. Martinez-Conde S., Macknik S.L. and Hubel D.H. (2000) Microsaccadic eye movements and firing of single cells in the striate cortex of macaque monkeys. Nat. Neurosci., 3:251-258. Matin L. and Pearce D.G. (1964) Three-dimensional recording of rotational eye movements by a new contact-lens technique. In: Murry W.E. and Salisbury P.F. (Eds.) Biomedical Sciences Instrumentation. New York: Plenum Press Matin L., Pola J., Matin E. and Picoult E. (1981) Vernier discrimination with sequentially-flashed lines: roles of eye movements, retinal offsets and short-term memory. Vision Res., 21:647-656. [Medline] McCormick D.A. and von Krosigk M. (1992) Corticothalamic activation modulates thalamic firing through glutamate ''metabotropic'' receptors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 89:2774-2778. [Medline] McKee S.P. and Levi D.M. (1987) Dichoptic hyperacuity: the precision of nonius alignment. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, 4:1104-1108. [Medline] McKee S.P., Welch L., Taylor D.G. and Bowne S.F. (1990) Finding the common bond: stereoacuity and the other hyperacuities. Vision Res., 30:879-891. [Medline] Morgan M.J. and Watt R.J. (1983) On the failure of spatiotemporal interpolation: a filtering model. Vision Res., 23:997-1004. [Medline] Morgan M.J., Watt R.J. and McKee S.P. (1983) Exposure duration affects the sensitivity of vernier acuity to target motion. Vision Res., 23:541-546. [Medline] Morgan M.J., Ward R.M. and Hole G.J. (1990) Evidence for positional coding in hyperacuity. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, 7:297-304. [Medline] Murakami I. and Cavanagh P. (1998) A jitter after-effect reveals motion-based stabilization of vision. Nature, 395:798-801. [Medline] Nicolelis M.A. and Chapin J.K. (1994) Spatiotemporal structure of somatosensory responses of many-neuron ensembles in the rat ventral posterior medial nucleus of the thalamus. J. Neurosci., 14:3511-3532. [Medline] Nicolelis M.A.L., Baccala L.A., Lin R.C.S. and Chapin J.K. (1995) Sensorimotor encoding by synchronous neural ensemble activity at multiple levels of the somatosensory system. Science, 268:1353-1358. [Medline] Nijhawan R. (1997) Visual decomposition of colour through motion extrapolation. Nature, 385:66-69. [Medline] Nirenberg S. and Meister M. (1997) The light response of retinal ganglion cells is truncated by a displaced amacrine circuit. Neuron, 18:637-650. [Medline][Summary][Full Text] Packer O. and Williams D.R. (1992) Blurring by fixational eye movements. Vision Res., 32:1931-1939. [Medline] Perkel D.H. and Bullock T.H. (1968) Neural coding. Neuroscience Research Program Bulletin, 6:221-248. Pritchard R.M. (1961) Stabilized images on the retina. Sci. Am., 204:72-78. [Medline] Pritchard R.M. and Heron W. (1960) Small eye movements of the cat. Can. J. Psychol., 14:131-137. [Medline] Purves D., Paydarfar J.A. and Andrews T.J. (1996) The wagon wheel illusion in movies and reality. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 93:3693-3697. [Medline] Ratliff F. and Riggs L.A. (1950) Involuntary motions of the eye during monocular fixation. J. Exp. Psychol., 40:687-701. [Medline] Riggs L.A. and Ratliff F. (1954) Motions of the retinal image during fixation. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, 44:315-321. [Medline] Riggs L.A., Ratliff F., Cornsweet J.C. and Cornsweet T.N. (1953) The disappearance of steadily fixated test objects. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, 43:495-501. [Medline] Sakuranaga M., Ando Y. and Naka K. (1987) Dynamics of the ganglion cell response in the catfish and frog retinas. J. Gen. Physiol., 90:229-259. [Medline] Salinas E., Hernandez A., Zainos A. and Romo R. (2000) Periodicity and firing rate as candidate neural codes for the frequency of vibrotactile stimuli. J. Neurosci., 20:5503-5515. [Medline] Shadlen M.N. and Newsome W.T. (1994) Noise, neural codes and cortical organization. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol., 4:569-579. [Medline] Shakhnovich A.R. The Brain and Regulation of Eye Movement. (1977) New York: Plenum Shapley R. and Victor J. (1986) Hyperacuity in cat retinal ganglion cells. Science, 231:999-1002. [Medline] Shechter S., Hochstein S. and Hillman P. (1988) Shape similarity and distance disparity as apparent motion correspondence cues. Vision Res., 28:1013-1021. [Medline] Sherman S.M. and Guillery R.W. (1996) Functional organization of thalamocortical relays. J. Neurophysiol., 76:1367-1395. [Medline] Shipley M.T. (1974) Response characteristics of single units in the rat's trigeminal nuclei to vibrissa displacements. J. Neurophysiol., 37:73-90. [Medline] Shulz D.E., Sosnik R., Ego V., Haidarliu S. and Ahissar E. (2000) A neuronal analogue of state-dependent learning. Nature, 403:549-553. [Medline] Simons D.J. (1978) Response properties of vibrissa units in rat SI somatosensory neocortex. J. Neurophysiol., 41:798-820. [Medline] Simons D.J. (1995) Neuronal integration in the somatosensory whisker/barrel cortex. In: Jones E.G. and Diamond I.T. (Eds.) Cerebral Cortex, Volume 11. New York: Plenum Press Simons D.J., Carvell G.E., Hershey A.E. and Bryant D.P. (1992) Responses of barrel cortex neurons in awake rats and effects of urethane anesthesia. Exp. Brain Res., 91:259-272. [Medline] Snodderly D.M., Kagan I. and Gur M. (2001) Selective activation of visual cortex neurons by fixational eye movements: Implications for neural coding. Vis. Neurosci., in press [Medline] Sosnik R., Haidarliu S. and Ahissar E. (2001) Temporal frequency of whisker movement. I. Representations in brain stem and thalamus. J. Neurophysiol., 86:339-353. [Medline] Spauschus A., Marsden J., Halliday D.M., Rosenberg J.R. and Brown P. (1999) The origin of ocular microtremor in man. Exp. Brain Res., 126:556-562. [Medline] Staiger J.F., Kotter R., Zilles K. and Luhmann H.J. (2000) Laminar characteristics of functional connectivity in rat barrel cortex revealed by stimulation with caged-glutamate. Neurosci. Res., 37:49-58. [Medline] Steinman R.M. and Levinson J.Z. (1990) The role of eye movement in the detection of contrast and spatial detail. In: Kowler E. (Ed.) Eye Movements and Their Role in Visual and Cognitive Processes. Amsterdam: Elsevier Swindale N.V. and Cynader M.S. (1986) Vernier acuity of neurones in cat visual cortex. Nature, 319:591-593. [Medline] Talbot W.H., Darian-Smith I., Kornhuber H.H. and Mountcastle V.B. (1968) The sense of flutter-vibration: comparison of the human capacity with response patterns of mechanoreceptive afferents from the monkey hand. J. Neurophysiol., 31:301-334. [Medline] Tsodyks M., Kenet T., Grinvald A. and Arieli A. (1999) Linking spontaneous activity of single cortical neurons and the underlying functional architecture. Science, 286:1943-1946. [Medline] Ungerleider L.G. and Haxby J.V. (1994) 'What' and 'where' in the human brain. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol., 4:157-165. [Medline] van Opstal A.J. and van Gisbergen J.A. (1989) Scatter in the metrics of saccades and properties of the collicular motor map. Vision Res., 29:1183-1196. [Medline] Verheijen F.J. (1961) A simple after image method demonstrating the involuntary multidirectional eye movements during fixation. J. Optica Acta, 8:309-311. Welker W.I. (1964) Analysis of sniffing of the albino rat. Behaviour, 22:223-244. [Medline] Westheimer G. (1976) Diffraction theory and visual hyperacuity. Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt., 53:362-364. [Medline] Westheimer G. (1990) The grain of visual space. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol., 55:759-763. White J.M., Levi D.M. and Aitsebaomo A.P. (1992) Spatial localization without visual references. Vision Res., 32:513-526. [Medline] Wiener N. Cybernetics. (1949) New York: John Wiley & Sons Wilson H.R. (1986) Responses of spatial mechanisms can explain hyperacuity. Vision Res., 26:453-469. [Medline] Wilson H.R. (1991) Pattern discrimination, visual filters and spatial sampling irregularity. In: Landy M. and Movshon J.A. (Eds.) Computational Models of Visual Processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press Wineski L.E. (1983) Movements of the cranial vibrissae in the golden hamster (Mesocricetus auratus) J. Zool. Lond., 200:261-280. Wise S.P. (1993) Monkey motor cortex: movements, muscles, motoneurons and metrics. Trends Neurosci., 16:46-49. [Medline] Woolsey T.A. (1997) Barrels, vibrissae and topographic representations. In: Adelman G. and Smith B. (Eds.) Encyclopedia of Neuroscience. Amsterdam: Elsevier Yarbus A.L. Eye Movements and Vision. (1967) New York: Plenum Zhang M. and Barash S. (2000) Neuronal switching of sensorimotor transformations for antisaccades. Nature, 408:971-975. [Medline] Zucker E. and Welker W.I. (1969) Coding of somatic sensory input by vibrissae neurons in the rat's trigeminal ganglion. Brain Res., 12:138-156. [Medline]
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||