4.1 Article

Homotypic constraints dominate positioning of on- and off-center beta retinal ganglion cells

期刊

VISUAL NEUROSCIENCE
卷 22, 期 6, 页码 859-871

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0952523805226147

关键词

beta retinal ganglion cells; retinal mosaics; functional independence; statistical independence; PIPP model

资金

  1. NEI NIH HHS [R01 EY006669-12S1, R01 EY006669, R01 EY06669] Funding Source: Medline
  2. Wellcome Trust Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Beta retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) of the cat are classified as either on-center or off-center, according to their response to light. The cell bodies of these on- and off-center RGCs are spatially distributed into regular patterns, known as retinal mosaics. In this paper, we investigate the nature of spatial dependencies between the positioning of on- and off-center RGCs by analysing maps of RGCs and simulating these patterns. We introduce principled approaches to parameter estimation, along with likelihood-based techniques to evaluate different hypotheses. Spatial constraints between cells within-type and between-type are assumed to be controlled by two univariate interaction functions and one bivariate interaction function. By making different assumptions on the shape of the bivariate interaction function, we can compare the hypothesis of statistical independence against the alternative hypothesis of functional independence, where interactions between type are limited to preventing somal overlap. Our findings suggest that the mosaics of on- and off-center beta RGCs are likely to be generated assuming functional independence between the two types. By contrast, allowing a more general form of bivariate interaction function did not improve the likelihood of generating the observed maps. On- and off-center beta RGCs are therefore likely to be positioned subject only to homotypic constraints and the physical constraint that no two somas of opposite type can occupy the same position.

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

4.1
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