Journal of Neurophysiology, Vol 75, Issue 5 2071-2088, Copyright © 1996 by APS

ARTICLES

GABA-induced inactivation of functionally characterized sites in cat visual cortex (area 18): effects on direction selectivity

J. M. Crook, Z. F. Kisvarday and U. T. Eysel
Department of Neurophysiology, Faculty of Medicine, Ruhr-University of Bochum, Germany.

1. Microiontophoresis of gamma-aminobutyric acid was used to reversibly inactivate small sites of defined orientation and direction specificity at a horizontal distance of 400-700 microns from single cells recorded in cat area 18. There was extensive or complete overlap between the receptive fields of cells at the recording and inactivation sites. A cell's directionality index [DI: 1 - (response to nonpreferred direction/response to preferred direction)], the response to the preferred direction, and orientation tuning width (measured at half the maximum response) were compared before and during inactivation of either iso-orientation sites (where the orientation preference was within 22.5 degrees) or cross-orientation sites (where it differed by 45-90 degrees). 2. During iso-orientation inactivation, 40 (73%) of 55 cells showed a significant (> 0.20) change in DI; the mean change in DI for these cells was 0.59. An additional cell showed a marked increase in response to the preferred direction that did not result in a change in DI. With one exception, the effects occurred in the absence of a significant (> 25%) change in orientation tuning width. 3. In most cases, the results were broadly predictable in the sense that iso-orientation inactivation predominantly affected a cell's response to the direction of motion of an optimally oriented bar that was closest to the preferred direction at the inactivation site: viz., a decrease in response to the preferred direction and an increase in response to the preferred or nonpreferred direction. 4. It is argued that the decreases in response were due to a reduction in the strength of intracortical iso-orientation excitatory connections made primarily between cells with similar direction preferences, whereas the increases in response involved a loss of iso-orientation inhibition. 5. In cases where remote inactivation caused an increase in response to the nonpreferred direction, comparable effects could be elicited when a mask left exposed only the excitatory subregion of the receptive field in S cells or the most responsive part of the excitatory discharge region in C cells. This implies extensive or complete spatial overlap between the profiles of excitation and inhibition in a cell's nonpreferred direction. 6. During cross-orientation inactivation, a significant change in DI was seen in only 14 (19%) of 73 cells and, with one exception, these changes were accompanied by increases in response to non-optimal orientations and significant broadening of orientation tuning. The effects of cross-orientation inactivation on directionality were presumably due to the loss of cross-orientation inhibition, which contributes primarily to orientation tuning. 7. Inactivation of the same site could cause an increase in response to the nonpreferred direction in cells recorded at iso-orientation sites and an increase in response to nonoptimal orientations and broadening of orientation tuning in cells recorded at cross-orientation sites. This is consistent with the notion that a single inhibitory neuron can contribute to the directionality or orientation tuning of different target cells depending on their location in the orientation map. 8. The results provide evidence for a major contribution of intrinsic mechanisms to the orientation tuning and direction selectivity of cells in cat area 18. It is proposed that two different intracortical processes are involved in the enhancement of orientation and direction selectivity: 1) suppression of responses to nonoptimal orientations and directions as a result of cross-orientation inhibition and iso-orientation inhibition; and 2) facilitation of responses to optimal orientations/directions via iso-orientation excitatory connections.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. G. Nowak, M. V. Sanchez-Vives, and D. A. McCormick Lack of Orientation and Direction Selectivity in a Subgroup of Fast-Spiking Inhibitory Interneurons: Cellular and Synaptic Mechanisms and Comparison with Other Electrophysiological Cell Types Cereb Cortex, May 1, 2008; 18(5): 1058 - 1078. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Roerig, B. Chen, and J. P.-Y. Kao Different Inhibitory Synaptic Input Patterns in Excitatory and Inhibitory Layer 4 Neurons of Ferret Visual Cortex Cereb Cortex, April 1, 2003; 13(4): 350 - 363. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. D. Miller Understanding Layer 4 of the Cortical Circuit: A Model Based on Cat V1 Cereb Cortex, January 1, 2003; 13(1): 73 - 82. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. A. W. Galuske, K. E. Schmidt, R. Goebel, S. G. Lomber, and B. R. Payne The role of feedback in shaping neural representations in cat visual cortex PNAS, December 24, 2002; 99(26): 17083 - 17088. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.-M. Hupe, A. C. James, P. Girard, and J. Bullier Response Modulations by Static Texture Surround in Area V1 of the Macaque Monkey Do Not Depend on Feedback Connections From V2 J Neurophysiol, January 1, 2001; 85(1): 146 - 163. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Roerig and J. P. Y. Kao Organization of Intracortical Circuits in Relation to Direction Preference Maps in Ferret Visual Cortex J. Neurosci., December 15, 1999; 19(24): RC44 - RC44. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]