Neural markers of suppression in impaired binocular vision
Even after conventional patching treatment, individuals with a history of amblyopia typically lack good stereo vision. This is often attributed to atypical suppression between the eyes, yet the specific mechanism is still unclear. Guided by computational models of binocular vision, we tested explici...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2021-04-01
|
| Series: | NeuroImage |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811921000574 |
| _version_ | 1829135746854813696 |
|---|---|
| author | Freya A. Lygo Bruno Richard Alex R. Wade Antony B. Morland Daniel H. Baker |
| author_facet | Freya A. Lygo Bruno Richard Alex R. Wade Antony B. Morland Daniel H. Baker |
| author_sort | Freya A. Lygo |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Even after conventional patching treatment, individuals with a history of amblyopia typically lack good stereo vision. This is often attributed to atypical suppression between the eyes, yet the specific mechanism is still unclear. Guided by computational models of binocular vision, we tested explicit predictions about how neural responses to contrast might differ in individuals with impaired binocular vision. Participants with a history of amblyopia (N = 25), and control participants with typical visual development (N = 19) took part in the study. Neural responses to different combinations of contrast in the left and right eyes, were measured using both electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Stimuli were sinusoidal gratings with a spatial frequency of 3c/deg, flickering at 4 Hz. In the fMRI experiment, we also ran population receptive field and retinotopic mapping sequences, and a phase-encoded localiser stimulus, to identify voxels in primary visual cortex (V1) sensitive to the main stimulus. Neural responses in both modalities increased monotonically with stimulus contrast. When measured with EEG, responses were attenuated in the weaker eye, consistent with a fixed tonic suppression of that eye. When measured with fMRI, a low contrast stimulus in the weaker eye substantially reduced the response to a high contrast stimulus in the stronger eye. This effect was stronger than when the stimulus-eye pairings were reversed, consistent with unbalanced dynamic suppression between the eyes. Measuring neural responses using different methods leads to different conclusions about visual differences in individuals with impaired binocular vision. Both of the atypical suppression effects may relate to binocular perceptual deficits, e.g. in stereopsis, and we anticipate that these measures could be informative for monitoring the progress of treatments aimed at recovering binocular vision. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-14T18:28:56Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-2603fcc7614f4b2dbdb729be6f30e652 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1095-9572 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-14T18:28:56Z |
| publishDate | 2021-04-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | NeuroImage |
| spelling | doaj.art-2603fcc7614f4b2dbdb729be6f30e6522022-12-21T22:51:50ZengElsevierNeuroImage1095-95722021-04-01230117780Neural markers of suppression in impaired binocular visionFreya A. Lygo0Bruno Richard1Alex R. Wade2Antony B. Morland3Daniel H. Baker4Department of Psychology, University of York, Heslington, York, UK; Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, London, UKDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, Rutgers University–Newark, Newark, NJ, USADepartment of Psychology, University of York, Heslington, York, UK; York Biomedical Research Institute, University of York, Heslington, York, UKDepartment of Psychology, University of York, Heslington, York, UK; York Biomedical Research Institute, University of York, Heslington, York, UKDepartment of Psychology, University of York, Heslington, York, UK; York Biomedical Research Institute, University of York, Heslington, York, UK; Corresponding author at: Department of Psychology, University of York, Heslington, York, UK.Even after conventional patching treatment, individuals with a history of amblyopia typically lack good stereo vision. This is often attributed to atypical suppression between the eyes, yet the specific mechanism is still unclear. Guided by computational models of binocular vision, we tested explicit predictions about how neural responses to contrast might differ in individuals with impaired binocular vision. Participants with a history of amblyopia (N = 25), and control participants with typical visual development (N = 19) took part in the study. Neural responses to different combinations of contrast in the left and right eyes, were measured using both electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Stimuli were sinusoidal gratings with a spatial frequency of 3c/deg, flickering at 4 Hz. In the fMRI experiment, we also ran population receptive field and retinotopic mapping sequences, and a phase-encoded localiser stimulus, to identify voxels in primary visual cortex (V1) sensitive to the main stimulus. Neural responses in both modalities increased monotonically with stimulus contrast. When measured with EEG, responses were attenuated in the weaker eye, consistent with a fixed tonic suppression of that eye. When measured with fMRI, a low contrast stimulus in the weaker eye substantially reduced the response to a high contrast stimulus in the stronger eye. This effect was stronger than when the stimulus-eye pairings were reversed, consistent with unbalanced dynamic suppression between the eyes. Measuring neural responses using different methods leads to different conclusions about visual differences in individuals with impaired binocular vision. Both of the atypical suppression effects may relate to binocular perceptual deficits, e.g. in stereopsis, and we anticipate that these measures could be informative for monitoring the progress of treatments aimed at recovering binocular vision.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811921000574DichopticfMRIInterocular suppressionSSVEPV1 |
| spellingShingle | Freya A. Lygo Bruno Richard Alex R. Wade Antony B. Morland Daniel H. Baker Neural markers of suppression in impaired binocular vision NeuroImage Dichoptic fMRI Interocular suppression SSVEP V1 |
| title | Neural markers of suppression in impaired binocular vision |
| title_full | Neural markers of suppression in impaired binocular vision |
| title_fullStr | Neural markers of suppression in impaired binocular vision |
| title_full_unstemmed | Neural markers of suppression in impaired binocular vision |
| title_short | Neural markers of suppression in impaired binocular vision |
| title_sort | neural markers of suppression in impaired binocular vision |
| topic | Dichoptic fMRI Interocular suppression SSVEP V1 |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811921000574 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT freyaalygo neuralmarkersofsuppressioninimpairedbinocularvision AT brunorichard neuralmarkersofsuppressioninimpairedbinocularvision AT alexrwade neuralmarkersofsuppressioninimpairedbinocularvision AT antonybmorland neuralmarkersofsuppressioninimpairedbinocularvision AT danielhbaker neuralmarkersofsuppressioninimpairedbinocularvision |