Contextual modulation revealed by optical imaging exhibits figural asymmetry in macaque V1 and V2

Functional modules for visual scene segmentation in macaque visual cortex

Segmentation, the computation of object boundaries, is one of the most important steps in intermediate visual processing. Previous studies have reported cells across visual cortex that are modulated by segmentation features, but the functional role of these cells remains unclear. First, it is unclear whether these cells encode segmentation consistently since most studies used only a limited variety of stimulus types. Second, it is unclear whether these cells are organized into specialized modules or instead randomly scattered across the visual cortex: the former would lend credence to a functional role for putative segmentation cells. Here, we used fMRI-guided electrophysiology to systematically characterize the consistency and spatial organization of segmentation-encoding cells across the visual cortex. Using fMRI, we identified a set of patches in V2, V3, V3A, V4, and V4A that were more active for stimuli containing figures compared to ground, regardless of whether figures were defined by texture, motion, luminance, or disparity. We targeted these patches for single-unit recordings and found that cells inside segmentation patches were tuned to both figure-ground and borders more consistently across types of stimuli than cells in the visual cortex outside the patches. Remarkably, we found clusters of cells inside segmentation patches that showed the same border-ownership preference across all stimulus types. Finally, using a population decoding approach, we found that segmentation could be decoded with higher accuracy from segmentation patches than from either color-selective or control regions. Overall, our results suggest that segmentation signals are preferentially encoded in spatially discrete patches.

The Mechanism of Macular Sparing

Patients with homonymous hemianopia sometimes show preservation of the central visual fields, ranging up to 10°. This phenomenon, known as macular sparing, has sparked perpetual controversy. Two main theories have been offered to explain it. The first theory proposes a dual representation of the macula in each hemisphere. After loss of one occipital lobe, the back-up representation in the remaining occipital lobe is postulated to sustain ipsilateral central vision in the blind hemifield. This theory is supported by studies showing that some midline retinal ganglion cells project to the wrong hemisphere, presumably driving neurons in striate cortex that have ipsilateral receptive fields. However, more recent electrophysiological recordings and neuroimaging studies have cast doubt on this theory by showing only a minuscule ipsilateral field representation in early visual cortical areas. The second theory holds that macular sparing arises because the occipital pole, where the macula is represented, remains perfused after occlusion of the posterior cerebral artery because it receives collateral flow from the middle cerebral artery. An objection to this theory is that it cannot account for reports of macular sparing in patients after loss of an entire occipital lobe. On close scrutiny, such reports turn out to be erroneous, arising from inadequate control of fixation during visual field testing. Patients seem able to detect test stimuli on their blind side within the macula or along the vertical meridian because they make surveillance saccades. A purported treatment for hemianopia, called vision restoration therapy, is based on this error. The dual perfusion theory is supported by anatomical studies showing that the middle cerebral artery perfuses the occipital pole in many individuals. In patients with hemianopia from stroke, neuroimaging shows preservation of the occipital pole when macular sparing is present. The frontier dividing the infarcted territory of the posterior cerebral artery and the preserved territory of the middle cerebral artery is variable, but always falls within the representation of the macula, because the macula is so highly magnified. For physicians, macular sparing was an important neurological sign in acute hemianopia because it signified a posterior cerebral artery occlusion. Modern neuroimaging has supplanted the importance of that clinical sign but at the same time confirmed its validity. For patients, macular sparing remains important because it mitigates the impact of hemianopia and preserves the ability to read fluently. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Vision Science, Volume 7 is September 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.