Adaptation to feedback representation of illusory orientation produced from flash grab effect

Adaptation is a ubiquitous property of sensory systems. It is typically considered that neurons adapt to dominant energy in the ambient environment to function optimally. However, perceptual representation of the stimulus, often modulated by feedback signals, sometimes do not correspond to the input state of the stimulus, which tends to be more linked with feedforward signals. Here we investigated the relative contributions to cortical adaptation from feedforward and feedback signals, taking advantage of a visual illusion, the Flash-Grab Effect, to disassociate the feedforward and feedback representation of an adaptor. Results reveal that orientation adaptation is exclusively dependent on the perceived rather than the retinal orientation of the adaptor. Combined fMRI and EEG measurements demonstrate that the perceived orientation of the Flash-Grab Effect is indeed supported by feedback signals in the cortex. These findings highlight the important contribution of feedback signals for cortical neurons to recalibrate their sensitivity. Feedforward-feedback signal interactions are common in the brain during sensory information processing. Here, the authors show that feedback-driven representation of perceived orientation dominates visual adaptation, despite the discrepant feedforward representation of input orientation.

[1]  D. Burr,et al.  Visual aftereffects , 2009, Current Biology.

[2]  D. Kersten,et al.  Orientation-tuned FMRI adaptation in human visual cortex. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

[3]  C. Clifford,et al.  A functional angle on some after-effects in cortical vision , 2000, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[4]  C. Gilbert,et al.  Top-down influences on visual processing , 2013, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[5]  Induced desensitization , 1986, Vision Research.

[6]  C. Blakemore,et al.  Lateral Inhibition between Orientation Detectors in the Human Visual System , 1970, Nature.

[7]  P. Dayan,et al.  Space and time in visual context , 2007, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[8]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[9]  G. Glover,et al.  Retinotopic organization in human visual cortex and the spatial precision of functional MRI. , 1997, Cerebral cortex.

[10]  Martin Luessi,et al.  MEG and EEG data analysis with MNE-Python , 2013, Front. Neuroinform..

[11]  Pieter R. Roelfsema,et al.  Distinct Roles of the Cortical Layers of Area V1 in Figure-Ground Segregation , 2013, Current Biology.

[12]  J. Movshon,et al.  Neuronal Adaptation to Visual Motion in Area MT of the Macaque , 2003, Neuron.

[13]  H. Seung,et al.  Tilt aftereffect and adaptation-induced changes in orientation tuning in visual cortex. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

[14]  Chris L. E. Paffen,et al.  Cortical depth dependent population receptive field attraction by spatial attention in human V1 , 2018, NeuroImage.

[15]  S. Solomon,et al.  Moving Sensory Adaptation beyond Suppressive Effects in Single Neurons , 2014, Current Biology.

[16]  Marisa Carrasco,et al.  Neural correlates of the visual vertical meridian asymmetry. , 2006, Journal of vision.

[17]  Susan G. Wardle,et al.  Decoding Dynamic Brain Patterns from Evoked Responses: A Tutorial on Multivariate Pattern Analysis Applied to Time Series Neuroimaging Data , 2016, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[18]  F. D. Lange,et al.  Selective Activation of the Deep Layers of the Human Primary Visual Cortex by Top-Down Feedback , 2016, Current Biology.

[19]  Yuli D. Chashechkin,et al.  Visualization of singular components of periodic motions in a continuously stratified fluid , 2007, J. Vis..

[20]  David Whitney,et al.  The motion-induced shift in the perceived location of a grating also shifts its aftereffect. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[21]  J. Gibson,et al.  ADAPTATION , AFTEREFFECT AND CONTRAST IN THE PERCEPTION OF TILTED LINES , 2004 .

[22]  Alex R. Wade,et al.  No Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Evidence for Brightness and Color Filling-In In Early Human Visual Cortex , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[23]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Canonical Microcircuits for Predictive Coding , 2012, Neuron.

[24]  Pieter R. Roelfsema,et al.  Benchmarking laminar fMRI: Neuronal spiking and synaptic activity during top-down and bottom-up processing in the different layers of cortex , 2017, NeuroImage.

[25]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Attentional resolution and the locus of visual awareness , 1996, Nature.

[26]  W L Sachtler,et al.  Motion Adaptation from Surrounding Stimuli , 1991, Perception.

[27]  Erin Goddard,et al.  Adaptable mechanisms sensitive to surface color in human vision. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[28]  Marisa Carrasco,et al.  Feature-based attention modulates orientation-selective responses in human visual cortex , 2010 .

[29]  Colin W.G. Clifford,et al.  Inter-ocular transfer of the tilt illusion shows that monocular orientation mechanisms are colour selective , 2005, Vision Research.

[30]  Sheng He,et al.  Orientation-selective adaptation and tilt after-effect from invisible patterns , 2001, Nature.

[31]  Tai Sing Lee,et al.  Contextual Influences in Visual Processing , 2008 .

[32]  R W Cox,et al.  AFNI: software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages. , 1996, Computers and biomedical research, an international journal.

[33]  J. Gibson,et al.  Adaptation, after-effect and contrast in the perception of tilted lines. I. Quantitative studies , 1937 .

[34]  I. Murakami,et al.  The tilt aftereffect occurs independently of the flash-lag effect , 2010, Vision Research.

[35]  Colin W G Clifford,et al.  The tilt illusion: Phenomenology and functional implications , 2014, Vision Research.

[36]  D. J. Felleman,et al.  Distributed hierarchical processing in the primate cerebral cortex. , 1991, Cerebral cortex.

[37]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[38]  D. Kersten,et al.  The representation of perceived angular size in human primary visual cortex , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.

[39]  Satoshi Someya,et al.  An experimental investigation of flow-induced acoustic resonance and flow field in a closed side branch system using a high time-resolved PIV technique , 2010, J. Vis..

[40]  Steen Moeller,et al.  T 1 weighted brain images at 7 Tesla unbiased for Proton Density, T 2 ⁎ contrast and RF coil receive B 1 sensitivity with simultaneous vessel visualization , 2009, NeuroImage.

[41]  Katrin Amunts,et al.  Comparative cytoarchitectural analyses of striate and extrastriate areas in hominoids. , 2010, Cerebral cortex.

[42]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Mapping Cortical Laminar Structure in the 3D BigBrain , 2018, Cerebral cortex.

[43]  Lucy S. Petro,et al.  Contextual Feedback to Superficial Layers of V1 , 2015, Current Biology.

[44]  David E. J. Linden,et al.  Orientation-specific adaptation to mentally generated lines in human visual cortex , 2009, NeuroImage.

[45]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Nonparametric permutation tests for functional neuroimaging: A primer with examples , 2002, Human brain mapping.

[46]  A. Kohn.  Visual adaptation: physiology, mechanisms, and functional benefits. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[47]  Kiyoshi Nosu,et al.  An immediate feedback video production system for a table tennis class , 2009, J. Vis..

[48]  V. Lamme,et al.  The distinct modes of vision offered by feedforward and recurrent processing , 2000, Trends in Neurosciences.

[49]  P. Tse,et al.  Motion-Induced Position Shifts Activate Early Visual Cortex , 2017, Front. Neurosci..

[50]  Rainer Goebel,et al.  Analysis of functional image analysis contest (FIAC) data with brainvoyager QX: From single‐subject to cortically aligned group general linear model analysis and self‐organizing group independent component analysis , 2006, Human brain mapping.

[51]  G. Rhodes,et al.  Fitting the Mind to the World: Adaptation and after-effects in high-level vision , 2005 .

[52]  Patrick Cavanagh,et al.  Strikingly rapid neural basis of motion-induced position shifts revealed by high temporal-resolution EEG pattern classification , 2015, Vision Research.

[53]  Patrick Cavanagh,et al.  The flash grab effect , 2012, Vision Research.

[54]  Nicolas S. Linder,et al.  Orientation-Specific Aftereffects to Mentally Generated Lines , 2011, Perception.

[55]  R. Oostenveld,et al.  Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG- and MEG-data , 2007, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[56]  M. Carandini,et al.  Adaptation maintains population homeostasis in primary visual cortex , 2013, Nature Neuroscience.

[57]  Christopher. Simons,et al.  Machine learning with Python , 2017 .

[58]  R. Goebel,et al.  Frequency preference and attention effects across cortical depths in the human primary auditory cortex , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[59]  Ikuya Murakami,et al.  Adaptation to a spatial offset occurs independently of the flash-drag effect. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[60]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[61]  Matthew W Self,et al.  Layer-specificity in the effects of attention and working memory on activity in primary visual cortex , 2017, Nature Communications.

[62]  Z. Pizlo.  Perception viewed as an inverse problem , 2001, Vision Research.

[63]  Lars Muckli,et al.  Primary Visual Cortex Activity along the Apparent-Motion Trace Reflects Illusory Perception , 2005, PLoS biology.

[64]  Denis Cousineau,et al.  Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson's method , 2005 .