The conditions under which retinal ganglion cells transmit visual signals synergistically remains a topic of considerable debate (Latham & Nirenberg,
2005; Schneidman, Bialek, & Berry,
2003; Schnitzer & Meister,
2003). Measurements of synergy between small groups of neurons have found evidence for everything from redundancy (Gawne & Richmond,
1993; Puchalla, Schneidman, Harris, & Berry,
2005; Warland, Reinagel, & Meister,
1997) to statistical independence (Nirenberg, Carcieri, Jacobs, & Latham,
2001; Panzeri, Schultz, Treves, & Rolls,
1999; Reich, Mechler, & Victor,
2001; Rolls, Franco, Aggelopoulos, & Reece,
2003) to both modest (Dan, Alonso, Usrey, & Reid,
1998) as well as more substantial levels of synergy (deCharms & Merzenich,
1996; Gat & Tishby,
1999; Hirabayashi & Miyashita,
2005; Riehle, Grun, Diesmann, & Aertsen,
1997; Samonds, Allison, Brown, & Bonds,
2004; Singer,
1999; Vaadia et al.,
1995). Several studies have looked specifically for synergy among larger ensembles (Bezzi, Diamond, & Treves,
2002; Frechette et al.,
2005; Narayanan, Kimchi, & Laubach,
2005; Stanley, Li, & Dan,
1999), yet it remains an open question as to how a nonlinear code based on spatiotemporal correlations between hundreds of neighboring ganglion cells—representing hundreds of thousands of neuron–neuron pairs—might convey local pixel-by-pixel intensity information that could not be obtained by analyzing the same spike trains individually, especially over the short time scales—approximately 50 to 300 ms—available for interpreting retinal output (Bacon-Mace, Mace, Fabre-Thorpe, & Thorpe,
2005; Kirchner & Thorpe,
2006; Rolls, Tovee, & Panzeri,
1999; Thorpe, Fize, & Marlot,
1996).