Abstract

Cells in the peripheral retina tend to have higher contrast sensitivity and respond at higher flicker frequencies than those closer to the fovea. Although this predicts increased behavioural temporal contrast sensitivity in the peripheral visual field, this effect is rarely observed in psychophysical experiments. It is unknown how temporal contrast sensitivity is represented across eccentricity within cortical visual field maps and whether such sensitivities reflect the response properties of retinal cells or psychophysical sensitivities. Here, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to measure contrast sensitivity profiles at four temporal frequencies in five retinotopically-defined visual areas. We also measured population receptive field (pRF) parameters (polar angle, eccentricity, and size) in the same areas. Overall contrast sensitivity, independent of pRF parameters, peaked at 10 Hz in all visual areas. In V1, V2, V3, and V3a, peripherally-tuned voxels had higher contrast sensitivity at a high temporal frequency (20 Hz), while hV4 more closely reflected behavioural sensitivity profiles. We conclude that our data reflect a cortical representation of the increased peripheral temporal contrast sensitivity that is already present in the retina and that this bias must be compensated later in the cortical visual pathway.

Highlights

  • There is a mismatch between electrophysiological retinal measurements and psychophysical measurements of temporal contrast sensitivity across the visual field

  • In early visual areas we found that population receptive field (pRF) representing the peripheral visual field had increased contrast sensitivity at a high temporal frequency (20 Hz) when compared to pRFs representing the fovea – consistent with effects predicted from retinal physiology

  • We find that contrast sensitivity in the periphery of V1, V2, V3, and V3a is increased at a high temporal frequency, but this sensitivity is lost in hV4 as cortical tuning becomes more similar that of the psychophysical observer

Read more

Summary

Introduction

There is a mismatch between electrophysiological retinal measurements and psychophysical measurements of temporal contrast sensitivity across the visual field. The peripheral retina has relatively more parasol cells, those cells integrate from larger portions of the retina, and they are fed by cones with brisker response kinetics (Dacey and Petersen, 1992; Enroth-Cugell and Shapley, 1973; Sinha et al, 2017). From such physiological differences we might expect subjects to be more sensitive to low contrast flickering stimuli in more peripheral regions of the visual field

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call