Extracting 3D from motion: differences in human and monkey intraparietal cortex.

We compared three-dimensional structure-from-motion (3D-SFM) processing in awake monkeys and humans using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Occipital and midlevel extrastriate visual areas showed similar activation by 3D-SFM stimuli in both species. In contrast, intraparietal areas showed significant 3D-SFM activation in humans but not in monkeys. This suggests that human intraparietal cortex contains visuospatial processing areas that are not present in monkeys.

Visual motion processing investigated using contrast agent-enhanced fMRI in awake behaving monkeys.

To reduce the information gap between human neuroimaging and macaque physiology and anatomy, we mapped fMRI signals produced by moving and stationary stimuli (random dots or lines) in fixating monkeys. Functional sensitivity was increased by a factor of approximately 5 relative to the BOLD technique by injecting a contrast agent (monocrystalline iron oxide nanoparticle [MION]). Areas identified as motion sensitive included V2, V3, MT/V5, vMST, FST, VIP, and FEF (with moving dots), as well as V4, TE, LIP, and PIP (with random lines). These regions sensitive for moving dots are largely in agreement with monkey single unit data and (except for V3A) with human fMRI results. Moving lines activate some regions that have not been previously implicated in motion processing. Overall, the results clarify the relationship between the motion pathway and the dorsal stream in primates.

Brain areas involved in rapid categorization of natural images: an event-related fMRI study.

Event-related fMRI was used to investigate brain activation during a visual go/no-go categorization task based on colored photographs of natural scenes, similar to a previous ERP study by Thorpe et al. (1996, Nature 381: 520-522). Subjects had to press a key when an animal was present in the display. Stimuli were flashed for 33 ms using an intertrial interval of 5 s and a design that carefully balanced targets and distractors in a pseudo-random sequence. Activation produced by targets and distractors was compared with two different techniques, one based on correlations with the stimulation pattern, the other using simple t score statistics to compare selected scans. The contralateral primary motor cortex and the ipsilateral cerebellum were both more active following target trials than following distractors, thus confirming the sensitivity of the method. Differential activity was also seen in the posterior cingulate cortex, the fusiform, and the parahippocampic gyri. Activity in such structures could underlie the differential evoked-potentials reported previously in the same task. Surprisingly, in these visual structures, the signal was stronger following distractor trials than target ones. This result could be due to more prolonged processing on distractor trials. Alternatively, it could be that target detection induces strong activation of a small proportion of neurons, which, because of competitive inhibitory mechanisms, could result in a decrease in activity for the population as a whole. We suggest that this kind of mechanism could also account for the decreases in signal observed in perceptual priming experiments.

Speed of processing in the human visual system.

How long does it take for the human visual system to process a complex natural image? Subjectively, recognition of familiar objects and scenes appears to be virtually instantaneous, but measuring this processing time experimentally has proved difficult. Behavioural measures such as reaction times can be used, but these include not only visual processing but also the time required for response execution. However, event-related potentials (ERPs) can sometimes reveal signs of neural processing well before the motor output. Here we use a go/no-go categorization task in which subjects have to decide whether a previously unseen photograph, flashed on for just 20 ms, contains an animal. ERP analysis revealed a frontal negativity specific to no-go trials that develops roughly 150 ms after stimulus onset. We conclude that the visual processing needed to perform this highly demanding task can be achieved in under 150 ms.