English
 
User Manual Privacy Policy Disclaimer Contact us
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  Motion-evoked brain activities in human and macaque MT

Ku, S.-P. (2005). Motion-evoked brain activities in human and macaque MT. In 6. Neurowissenschaftliche Nachwuchskonferenz Tübingen (NeNa 2005) (pp. 10).

Item is

Basic

show hide
Item Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-D491-F Version Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0005-4171-2
Genre: Meeting Abstract

Files

show Files

Locators

show

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Ku, S-P1, 2, Author              
Affiliations:
1Department Physiology of Cognitive Processes, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, ou_1497798              
2Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, Spemannstrasse 38, 72076 Tübingen, DE, ou_1497794              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: In 1971 people defined that an area in macaque’s brain in the depths of the superior temporal sulcus contains a large majority of neurons who are selective for the direction of motion of visual stimuli (Dubner Zeki, 1971; Zeki, 1974). This region, which is named V5/MT nowadays receives a lot of attention since then because the neurons in this region have wellcharacteristic parametric properties. For example, using stochastic random-dot patterns in which the experimenter controlled the strength of the motion signal by specifying the percentage of dots undergoing coherent rather than random motion, people found that most MT neurons respond approximately linearly to changes in the strength of the motion signal (Britten et al., 1993). Base on electrophysiological evidences, people were also able to quantify the relationship between functional properties of human-MT+ and motion strength using fMRI (Rees et al., 2000). All these results suggest that using coherent-motion patterns comparing to incoherent motion as visual stimuli one should be able to map area MT using fMRI. However, my own results and a historical publication, though PET instead of fMRI was used (Watson et al., 1993), both indicate that this is not the case. Is there any artifact involved in my experiment-design? Or this difference reveals some fundamental properties of the dynamic brain activity? In my talk I will compare the differences of the experimentdesigns between my experiment and the previous study and try to propose some possible mechanisms which might be explaining the differences between the two studies. These differences might lead to future investigations of neural mechanisms underlying the brain activities.

Details

show
hide
Language(s):
 Dates: 2005-09
 Publication Status: Published online
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Method: -
 Identifiers: BibTex Citekey: Ku2005
 Degree: -

Event

show
hide
Title: 6. Neurowissenschaftliche Nachwuchskonferenz Tübingen (NeNa 2005)
Place of Event: Blaubeuren, Germany
Start-/End Date: -

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: 6. Neurowissenschaftliche Nachwuchskonferenz Tübingen (NeNa 2005)
Source Genre: Proceedings
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: -
Pages: - Volume / Issue: - Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 10 Identifier: -