SPATIAL ASYMMETRIES IN CAT RETINAL GANGLION-CELL RESPONSES

Citation
P. Gaudiano et al., SPATIAL ASYMMETRIES IN CAT RETINAL GANGLION-CELL RESPONSES, Biological cybernetics, 79(2), 1998, pp. 151-159
Citations number
26
Categorie Soggetti
Computer Science Cybernetics",Neurosciences
Journal title
ISSN journal
03401200
Volume
79
Issue
2
Year of publication
1998
Pages
151 - 159
Database
ISI
SICI code
0340-1200(1998)79:2<151:SAICRG>2.0.ZU;2-9
Abstract
Enroth-Cugell and Robson (1966) first proposed a classification of ret inal ganglion cells into X cells, which exhibit approximate linear spa tial summation and largely sustained responses, and Y cells, which exh ibit nonlinearities and transient responses. Gaudiano (1992a, 1992b, 1 994) has suggested that the dominant characteristics of both X and Y c ells can be simulated with a single model simply by changing receptive field profiles to match those of the anatomical counterparts of X and Y cells. He also proposed that a significant component of the spatial nonlinearities observed in Y (and sometimes X) cells can result from photoreceptor nonlinearities coupled with push-pull bipolar connection s. Specifically, an asymmetry was predicted in the ganglion cell respo nse to rectangular gratings presented at different locations in the re ceptive field under two conditions: introduction/withdrawal (on-off) o r contrast reversal. When measuring the response to these patterns as a function of spatial phase, the standard difference-of-Gaussians mode l predicts symmetrical responses about the receptive field center, whi le the push-pull model predicts slight but significant asymmetry in th e on-off case only. To test this hypothesis, we have recorded ganglion cell responses from the optic tract fibers of anesthetized cat. The m ean and standard deviations of responses to on-off and contrast-revers ed patterns were compared. We found that all but one of the cells that yielded statistically significant data confirmed the hypothesis. Thes e results largely support the theoretical prediction.