Using two microelectrodes, recordings were made from pairs of like-signed cells at different depths in single layers (A or Al) of the cat's lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN). The cells were chosen to have near or overlapping receptive fields so that they could be stimulated simultaneously with a single spot or bar of light. Under these controlled conditions, paired X cells (n = 32 pairs) showed differences in latency from less than 10 to about 80 ms, but no latency differences were observed between paired Y cells (n = 3 pairs). Within XY pairs (n = 11) the Y cells responded faster than the X cells. A separate analysis of previously reported, singly recorded X cells (n= 131) also showed wide differences in X cell latencies.

The results confirm that temporal differences in signalling occur within the X pathway in the cat LGN (Mastronarde, 1981, 1987a; Humphrey & Weller, 1988a) and they show explicitly that the differences occur simultaneously, in single layers and at single retinotopic loci. No consistent relationship was found between timing and depth, but the possibility of weak, depth-dependent trends is considered in the Discussion.

Motion processing is a fundamental task of visual systems, and in the monkey cortical areas can be identified which appear to be functionally specialized for motion processing. The human visual system is expected to be organized in a similar way. A noninvasive method to study the functional organization of the visual cortex is the recording of scalp potentials generated by neural activity of the underlying cortical areas. In the present study, we recorded slow cortical potentials from normal subjects in order to investigate how motion stimuli are processed. Three classes of object motion were realized as random dot kinematograms, namely Fourier motion, drift-balanced motion, and theta motion, because they require mechanisms of increasing complexity in order to be extracted. Large-field motion and counterphase flicker were used as control stimuli. Three basic results were obtained: (1) The responses evoked by the three classes of object motion do not differ significantly in their time course and distribution of activation. (2) The distributions of cortical activation evoked by object motion, and the control stimuli are different. During object motion the maximum activation occurs over the superior parietal cortex. Large-field motion activates occipital and parietal locations to the same extent, and during counterphase flicker the activity is maximum over the occipital lobe. Thus, the parietal slow potentials are interpreted to specifically reflect the cortical processing of object motion. (3) The time course of the activation reflects changes in the spatial position of the object: the amplitude of a transient negative component (TNC) which occurs 240 ms after motion onset decreases with increasing eccentricity of motion onset. The consecutive sustained negative component (SNC), which persists until the movement stops, decreases during centrifugal and increases during centripetal object motion. These results can be understood on the basis of physiological and anatomical knowledge about the mapping of the visual field on the cortex.

Tethered adult female praying mantises, Sphodromantis lineola (Burr.), were presented with various computer-generated visual stimuli that moved against patterned or homogeneous white backgrounds in predetermined patterns and at predetermined speeds. The degrees to which the stimulus configurations elicited appetitive behaviors (attempting to approach and/or striking) indicated the relative degrees to which the stimuli were classified as prey. Mantises readily struck at cartoon “crickets” that subtended visual angles as great as 24.5 deg x 62.5 deg, but response rate was suppressed if the stimuli were superimposed on horizontally moving patterned backgrounds. Mantises also displayed appetitive behaviors to moving black squares (edge lengths = 10–47 deg) that moved in predetermined “erratic” paths; however, their response rates were affected by several factors: (1) response rate declined as edge length increased over 10 deg; (2) striking was emitted to stimuli viewed from 23 mm (but not farther) away; and (3) both stimulus displacement rate (distance moved between video frames) and apparent speed (video frame rate) dramatically affected the releasing strength of the stimuli. Finally, mantises responded appetitively to random dot patterns moving synchronously against identically patterned backgrounds and to pairs of black squares moving synchronously against a white background. However, in the latter case, response rate declined as the squares were moved farther apart horizontally or vertically. These and previous results from our laboratory on mantises are congruent with behavioral results obtained from other insects such as flies (Diptera) and dragon flies (Odonata) and suggest that there are neuroanatomical similarities between these groups.

The excitatory receptive-field centers of On-Off directionally selective (DS) ganglioncells of the rabbit retina correspond closely to the lateral extent of their dendritic arborizations. Some investigators have hypothesized from this that theories for directionalselectivity that entail a lateral spread of excitation from outside the ganglion cell dendritic tree, such as from starburst amacrine cells, are therefore untenable. We show herethat significant motion facilitation is conducted from well outside the classical excitatory receptive-field center (and, therefore, dendritic arborization) of On-Off DS ganglioncells for preferred-direction, but not null-direction moving stimuli. These results are consistent with a role in directional selectivity for cells with processes lying beyond the On-Off ganglion cell's excitatory receptive-field center. These results also highlight the fundamental distinction in retinal ganglion cell receptive-field organization between classical excitatory mechanisms and those that facilitate other excitation without producing directly observable excitation by themselves.

Visual information is processed in a series of subsequent steps. The performance of each of these steps depends not only on the computations it performs itself but also on the representation of the visual surround on which it operates. Here we investigate the consequences of signal preprocessing for the performance of the motion-detection system of the fly. In particular, we analyze whether the retinal input signals are rectified and segregate into separate ON and OFF channels, which then feed independent parallel motion-detection pathways. We recorded the activity of an identified directionally selective interneuron (HI-cell) in response to apparent motion stimuli, i.e. sequential brightness changes at two neighboring locations in the visual field, as well as to brightness changes at only a single location. For apparent motion stimuli, the motion-dependent response component was determined by subtracting from the overall response the responses to the individual stimulus components when presented alone. The following conclusions could be derived: (1) Apparent motion consisting of a sequence of increased or decreased brightness at two locations in the visual field have the same optimum interstimulus time interval (Fig. 3). (2) Sequences of brightness steps of like polarity (either increments or decrements) elicit positive and negative motion-dependent response components when mimicking motion in the cell's preferred and null direction, respectively. The motion-dependent response components are inverted in sign when the brightness steps of a stimulus sequence have a different polarity (Fig. 7). (3) The responses to the beginning and the end of a brightness pulse depend on the pulse duration. For pulse durations of less than 2 s, both events interact with each other (Fig. 9). All of these results do not provide any indication that the fly processes motion information in independent ON and OFF motion detectors. Brightness changes of both signs are rather represented at the input of the same movement detectors, and interactions between signals resulting from both brightness increments and decrements take their sign into account. This type of preprocessing of the retinal input is argued to render a motion-detection system particularly robust against noise.