4.7 Article

Infragranular Sources of Sustained Local Field Potential Responses in Macaque Primary Visual Cortex

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 31, 期 6, 页码 1971-1980

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5300-09.2011

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of Mental Health
  2. National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke
  3. National Eye Institute

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A local field potential (LFP) response can be measured throughout the visual cortex in response to the abrupt appearance of a visual stimulus. Averaging LFP responses to many stimulus presentations isolates transient, phase-locked components of the response that are consistent from trial to trial. However, stimulus responses are also composed of sustained components, which differ in their phase from trial to trial and therefore must be evaluated using other methods, such as computing the power of the response of each trial before averaging. Here, we investigate the basis of phase-locked and non-phase-locked LFP responses in the primary visual cortex of the macaque monkey using a novel variant of current source density (CSD) analysis. We applied a linear array of electrode contacts spanning the thickness of the cortex to measure the LFP and compute band-limited CSD power to identify the laminar sites of persistent current exchange that may be the basis of sustained visual LFP responses. In agreement with previous studies, we found a short-latency phase-locked current sink, thought to correspond to thalamocortical input to layer 4C. In addition, we found a prominent non-phase-locked component of the CSD that persisted as long as the stimulus was physically present. The latter was relatively broadband, lasted throughout the stimulus presentation, and was centered similar to 500 mu m deeper than the initial current sink. These findings demonstrate a fundamental difference in the neural mechanisms underlying the initial and sustained processing of simple visual stimuli in the V1 microcircuit.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据