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
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • 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
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Brief Communications

Direction Opponency, Not Quadrature, Is Key to the 1/4 Cycle Preference for Apparent Motion in the Motion Energy Model

Nicolas Heess and Wyeth Bair
Journal of Neuroscience 25 August 2010, 30 (34) 11300-11304; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1271-10.2010
Nicolas Heess
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Wyeth Bair
  • 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

Abstract

Sensitivity to visual motion is a fundamental property of neurons in the visual cortex and has received wide attention in terms of mathematical models. A key feature of many popular models for cortical motion sensors is the use of pairs of functions that are related by a 90° phase shift. This phase relationship, known as quadrature, is the hallmark of the motion energy model and played an important role in the development of a class of model dubbed elaborated Reichardt detectors. For decades, the literature has supported a link between quadrature and the observation that motion detectors and human observers often prefer a 1/4 cycle displacement of an apparent motion stimulus that consists of a pair of sinusoidal gratings. We show that there is essentially no link between quadrature and this preference. Quadrature is neither necessary nor sufficient for a motion sensor to prefer 1/4 cycle displacement, and motion energy is not maximized for a 1/4 cycle step. Other properties of motion sensors are the key: the opponent subtraction of two oppositely tuned stages that individually have sinusoidal displacement tuning curves. Thus, psychophysical and neurophysiological data revealing a preference at or near 1/4 cycle displacement do not offer specific support for common quadrature or energy-based motion models. Instead, they point to a broader class of model.

View Full Text
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 30 (34)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 30, Issue 34
25 Aug 2010
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
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.
Direction Opponency, Not Quadrature, Is Key to the 1/4 Cycle Preference for Apparent Motion in the Motion Energy Model
(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
Direction Opponency, Not Quadrature, Is Key to the 1/4 Cycle Preference for Apparent Motion in the Motion Energy Model
Nicolas Heess, Wyeth Bair
Journal of Neuroscience 25 August 2010, 30 (34) 11300-11304; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1271-10.2010

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
Direction Opponency, Not Quadrature, Is Key to the 1/4 Cycle Preference for Apparent Motion in the Motion Energy Model
Nicolas Heess, Wyeth Bair
Journal of Neuroscience 25 August 2010, 30 (34) 11300-11304; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1271-10.2010
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

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

  • Heteromodal Cortical Areas Encode Sensory-Motor Features of Word Meaning
  • Pharmacologically Counteracting a Phenotypic Difference in Cerebellar GABAA Receptor Response to Alcohol Prevents Excessive Alcohol Consumption in a High Alcohol-Consuming Rodent Genotype
  • Neuromuscular NMDA Receptors Modulate Developmental Synapse Elimination
Show more Brief Communications
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • 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 Policy
  • Contact
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2023 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.