September 2019
Volume 19, Issue 10
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2019
Motion-Defined Form Discrimination in Human V5/MT+
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Samantha L Strong
    School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Bradford, UK
  • Edward H Silson
    Laboratory of Brain and Cognition, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, USA
  • André D Gouws
    York Neuroimaging Centre, Department of Psychology, University of York, UK
  • Antony B Morland
    York Neuroimaging Centre, Department of Psychology, University of York, UK
    Centre for Neuroscience, Hull-York Medical School, University of York, UK
  • Declan J McKeefry
    School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Bradford, UK
Journal of Vision September 2019, Vol.19, 287. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/19.10.287
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Samantha L Strong, Edward H Silson, André D Gouws, Antony B Morland, Declan J McKeefry; Motion-Defined Form Discrimination in Human V5/MT+. Journal of Vision 2019;19(10):287. doi: https://doi.org/10.1167/19.10.287.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Human V5/MT+ is a motion-sensitive cortical region that can be parcellated into at least two smaller sub-divisions: MT/TO-1 and MST/TO-2 (Amano et al., 2009). Previous work using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has shown that these areas possess distinct functional preferences. For example, both MT/TO-1 and MST/TO-2 appear to process low-level local motion directions (translational), whilst processing of more complex global motion directions (radial/rotational) appears to be restricted to MST/TO-2 (Smith et al., 2006; Strong et al., 2017). However, it is rare to experience a natural visual scenario in which stimuli constitute only one direction of motion, so the next step would be to work towards determining whether these areas also contribute to ‘higher-level’ motion processing. One example of this type of processing is motion-defined form, i.e. a shape possessing borders defined by moving stimuli as opposed to a static outline. This project utilised fMRI-guided repetitive TMS (25Hz; 70%; 200ms) in order to determine the roles of MT/TO-1 and MST/TO-2 in a two-interval forced choice (2IFC) shape discrimination task. This involved identifying which interval contained the more circular of a camouflaged ellipse. This ellipse was defined by a region of supra-threshold coherently moving (translational) dots immersed within an aperture of moving noise dots. The relative size difference in semi-minor axis of the ellipse was set to each individual’s pre-determined threshold level. Results (percent correct responses) revealed that application of TMS to MST/TO-2 can disrupt ability to perceive these motion-defined shapes (MST/TO-2 versus MT/TO-1, p< 0.05; MST/TO-2 versus Baseline, p< 0.05; MST/TO-2 versus Control, p< 0.05). Overall, although both MT/TO-1 and MST/TO-2 maintain some responsibility for processing translational motion directions, discrimination of shapes defined by supra-threshold translational motion appears to be restricted to MST/TO-2. This suggests that processing of ‘higher-level’ natural stimuli may begin in MST/TO-2.

Acknowledgement: BBSRC 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×