Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
ARTICLE

Reconstruction of Natural Scenes from Ensemble Responses in the Lateral Geniculate Nucleus

Garrett B. Stanley, Fei F. Li and Yang Dan
Journal of Neuroscience 15 September 1999, 19 (18) 8036-8042; https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.19-18-08036.1999
Garrett B. Stanley
1Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Division of Neurobiology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Fei F. Li
1Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Division of Neurobiology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yang Dan
1Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Division of Neurobiology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Fig. 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 1.

    The procedure for reconstructing visual stimuli from the responses of multiple neurons. a, Receptive fields of eight neurons recorded simultaneously with multielectrodes. These receptive fields were mapped with white-noise stimuli and the reverse correlation method (Sutter, 1987; Reid et al., 1997).Red, On responses. Blue, Off responses. The brightest colors correspond to the strongest responses. The area shown is 3.6 × 3.6°. The responses of these cells were used to reconstruct visual inputs at the four pixels (0.2°/pixel) outlined with the white squares. b, Linear filters for input reconstruction. The eight blocks correspond to the eight cells shown in a. Shown in each block are the four filters from that cell to the four pixels outlined in a. They represent the linear estimates of the input signals at these pixels immediately preceding and following a spike of that cell. Each filter is 3.1-sec-long, with 1.55 sec before and 1.55 sec after the spike. c, Spike trains of the eight neurons in response to movie stimuli. d, The actual (black) and the reconstructed (magenta) movie signals at the four pixels outlined in a. Unlike white noise, natural visual signals exhibit more low-frequency, slow variations than high-frequency, fast variations. Such temporal features are well captured by the reconstruction.

  • Fig. 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 2.

    Reconstruction of natural scenes from the responses of a population of neurons. a, Receptive fields of 177 cells used in the reconstruction. Each receptive field was fitted with a two-dimensional Gaussian function. Each ellipse represents the contour at one SD from the center of the Gaussian fit. Note that the actual receptive fields (including surround) are considerably larger than these ellipses. Red, On center.Blue, Off center. An area of 32 × 32 pixels (0.2°/pixel) where movie signals were reconstructed is outlined inwhite. The grid inside the white square delineates the pixels. b, Comparison between the actual and the reconstructed images in an area of 6.4 × 6.4° (a, white square). Each panel shows four consecutive frames (interframe interval, 31.1 msec) of the actual (top) and the reconstructed (bottom) movies. Top panel, Scenes in the woods, with two trunks of trees as the most prominent objects.Middle panel, Scenes in the woods, with smaller tree branches. Bottom panel, A face at slightly different displacements on the screen. c, Quantitative comparison between the reconstructed and the actual movie signals.Top, Histogram of temporal correlation coefficients between the actual and the reconstructed signals (both as functions of time) at each pixel. The histogram was generated from 1024 (32 × 32) pixels in the white square. Bottom,Histogram of spatial correlation coefficients between the actual and the reconstructed signals (both as functions of spatial position) at each frame. The histogram was generated from 4096 frames (512 frames per movie; 8 movies).

  • Fig. 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 3.

    Evaluation of reconstruction using spectral analyses. Because natural scenes were presented at 32 Hz, these analyses were performed at up to 16 Hz. a, Temporal power spectra of the actual and the reconstructed inputs. Both were averaged from 192 pixels near the center of the screen. For each pixel, the input was reconstructed from the same cells used in Figure 2.b, Comparison between the SER of the reconstruction and the theoretical SER estimated based on the noise in the neuronal responses. Above 3 Hz these two curves are not significantly different. The control SER represents the SER of the reconstruction if there is no causal relationship between the visual stimuli and the neuronal responses. It provides a baseline against which the significance of the real SER can be judged. All three curves were averaged from the same 192 pixels used in a. Vertical linesrepresent SEs. For the control SER, the error bars are smaller than the thickness of the line.

  • Fig. 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig. 4.

    Dependence of the quality of reconstruction on the number of cells. a, Spatial distribution of cell density and reconstruction quality from the results shown in Figure 2.Ellipses represent centers of receptive fields. On and off cells are represented by the same color. Correlation coefficient between the actual and the reconstructed stimuli (minimum, 0.52; maximum, 0.79) is indicated by the brightness at each pixel. Note that areas covered by higher densities of cells have higher correlation coefficients between the reconstructed and the actual inputs.b, The average temporal correlation coefficient between the actual and the reconstructed natural scenes versus the number of cells used for reconstruction. c, The temporal total SER of the reconstruction (natural scenes) of each pixel versus the number of cells used for that pixel. Total SER was defined as the ratio between the total power of the actual input (integrated between 0.125 and 16 Hz) and the total power of the error. In this analysis, we always used equal numbers of on and off cells. Each point represents the mean from multiple (160–192) pixels near the center of the screen. The vertical lines represent SEs. For bothb and c, we included data from four of the eight different movie clips whose statistics closely matched that for natural scenes described in previous studies (Field, 1987; Dong and Atick, 1995). d,e, The same as b andc, respectively, except the stimulus is spatiotemporal white noise. Here, the white noise was presented at 128 Hz. For calculating the correlation coefficient, both the actual and reconstructed white-noise signals were averaged every four frames to match the sampling rate of natural scenes.

Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 19 (18)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 19, Issue 18
15 Sep 1999
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Reconstruction of Natural Scenes from Ensemble Responses in the Lateral Geniculate Nucleus
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Reconstruction of Natural Scenes from Ensemble Responses in the Lateral Geniculate Nucleus
Garrett B. Stanley, Fei F. Li, Yang Dan
Journal of Neuroscience 15 September 1999, 19 (18) 8036-8042; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.19-18-08036.1999

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
Reconstruction of Natural Scenes from Ensemble Responses in the Lateral Geniculate Nucleus
Garrett B. Stanley, Fei F. Li, Yang Dan
Journal of Neuroscience 15 September 1999, 19 (18) 8036-8042; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.19-18-08036.1999
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • LGN
  • reconstruction
  • natural scenes
  • ensemble responses
  • cat
  • visual system

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Scaffolding of Fyn Kinase to the NMDA Receptor Determines Brain Region Sensitivity to Ethanol
  • Cytoskeletal and Morphological Alterations Underlying Axonal Sprouting after Localized Transection of Cortical Neuron AxonsIn Vitro
  • Aberrant Chloride Transport Contributes to Anoxic/Ischemic White Matter Injury
Show more ARTICLE
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Accessibility
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2025 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.