↓ Skip to main content

Color Representation Is Retinotopically Biased but Locally Intermingled in Mouse V1

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neural Circuits, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Color Representation Is Retinotopically Biased but Locally Intermingled in Mouse V1
Published in
Frontiers in Neural Circuits, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fncir.2017.00022
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shuhei Aihara, Takashi Yoshida, Takayuki Hashimoto, Kenichi Ohki

Abstract

Dichromatic vision is common in many mammals. However, color processing in the primary visual cortex (V1) of dichromatic mammals is relatively unknown compared to the trichromatic primates. In this study, we investigated the functional organization of color processing in mouse V1. The mouse retina has a graded expression pattern of two opsins along its dorsoventral axis. However, it is not clear whether and how this expression pattern is reflected in the cortical representation at local (several hundred microns) and areal (V1) level. Using in vivo two-photon calcium (Ca(2+)) imaging and wide-field Ca(2+) imaging, we revealed that V1 neurons responded to S (UV)- and M (green)-opsin isolating stimuli with slightly biased color preference depending on retinotopic position in V1. This was consistent with the distribution of retinal opsins. At the cellular level, preferences for S- and M-opsin isolating stimuli were intermingled in a local region encompassing several hundred microns. These results suggest that functional organizations of color information are locally intermingled, but slightly biased depending on the retinotopic position in mouse V1.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 23%
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Master 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 4 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 17 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 7 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,412,387
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#1,033
of 1,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,302
of 308,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neural Circuits
#26
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,221 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,953 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.