Show Tag: superficial-sc

Select Other Tags

Visual receptive fields in the superficial hamster SC do not vary substantially in RF size with RF eccentricity.

Visual receptive field sizes change in the deep SC with eccentricity, they do not in the superficial hamster SC.

Response properties in mouse superficial SC neurons are not strongly influenced by experience.

How strongly SC neurons' development depends on experience (and how strongly well they are developed after birth) is different from species to species, so just because the superficial mouse SC is developed at birth, doesn't mean it is in other species (and I believe responsiveness in cats develops with experience).

Response properties of superficial SC neurons is different from those found in mouse V1 neurons.

Response properties of superficial SC neurons are different in different animals.

The topographic map of visual space in the sSC is retinotopic.

Spatial attention can enhance the activity of SC neurons whose receptive fields overlap the attended region

The superficial SC is modeled by Casey et al.'s system by two populations of center-on and center-off cells (whose receptive fields are modeled by a difference of Gaussians) and four populations of direction-sensitive cells.

Some authors distinguish only superficial and deep superior colliculus.

(Retinal) visual input to the left SC mainly originates in the retina of the right eye and vice-versa.

Ablation of the superficial SC does not result in blindness or orienting deficiencies. Only when the deep SC is ablated do these deficiencies occur—a remarkable finding considering that the superficial SC is the main target of retinotectal projections.

The superficial SC projects retinotopically to LGN.

The same regions in LGN receiving projections from the superficial SC project to the cortex.

Superficial layers of the SC project to deep layers.

Both deep and superficial layers in left and right SC project to the corresponding layer in the contralateral SC.

There are excitatory and inhibitory connections from the deep to the superficial SC.

The excitatory and inhibitory connections from the deep to the superficial SC and the connection from the superficial SC to LGN may be one route through which deep SC activity may reach cortex.

There are inhibitory connections from deep SC to superficial SC (SGI to SGS).

The superficial cat SC is not responsive to auditory stimuli.

The superficial SC of the owl is strongly audio-visual.

The map of visual space in the superficial SC of the mouse is in rough topographic register with the map formed by the tactile receptive fields of whiskers (and other body hairs) in deeper layers.

The superficial mouse SC is not responsive to auditory or tactile stimuli.

The stratum zonale is the outermost, almost cell-free lamina of the SC.

The stratum griseum superficiale is the SC layer below the stratum zonale. It contains many small cells.

The stratum opticum is the innermost of the superficial SC layers, below the stratum griseum. It is dominated by fibers including retinal projections.

Superficial SC neurons seem to have little to no access to color information.

Goldberg and Wurtz found that neurons in the superficial SC respond more vigorously to visual stimuli in their receptive field if the current task is to make a saccade to the stimuli.

Responses of superficial SC neurons do not depend solely to intrinsic stimulus properties.

The mammalian SC is divided into seven layers with alternating fibrous and cellular layers.

The superficial layers include layers I-III, while the deep layers are layers IV-VII.

Some authors distinguish a third, intermediate, set of layers (IV,V).

There are ascending projections from the superficial SC to the Thalamus and from there to extrastriate cortex.

There are descending projections from the SC to the parabigeminal nucleus, or nucleus isthmii as it is called in non-mammals.

The superficial SC is visuotopic.

The part of the visual map in the superficial SC corresponding to the center of the visual field has the highest spatial resolution.

Visual receptive fields in the deeper SC are larger than in the superficial SC.

The parts of the sensory map in the deeper SC corresponding to peripheral visual space have better representation than in the visual superficial SC.

Do the parts of the sensory map in the deeper SC corresponding to peripheral visual space have better representation than in the visual superficial SC because they integrate more information; does auditory or tactile localization play a more important part in multisensory localization there?

Visual receptive fields in the superficial monkey SC do vary substantially in RF size with RF eccentricity.

In some animals, receptive field sizes do and in some they don't change substantially with RF excentricity.

The neurons in the superficial (rhesus) monkey SC do not exhibit strong selectivity for specific shapes, stimulus orientation, or moving directions. Some of them do show selectivity to stimuli of specific sizes.

The activity profiles for stimuli moving through superficial SC neuron RFs shown in Cynader and Berman's work look similar to Poisson-noisy Gaussians, however, the authors state that the strength of a response to a stimulus was the same regardless where in the activating region it was shown.

The neurons in the superficial (rhesus) monkey SC largely prefer moving stimuli over non-moving stimuli.

In the intermediate layers of the monkey SC, neurons have a tendency to reduce or otherwise their reaction to presentations of the same stimulus over time.

There are marked differences in the receptive field properties of superficial cat and monkey SC neurons.

There are monosynaptic connections from the retina to neurons both in the superficial and deeper layers of the SC.

Neurons in the superficial SC are almost exclusively visual in most species.

The retina projects to the superficial SC directly.