Braddick O J, O'Brien J M, Wattam-Bell J, Atkinson J, Turner R
Visual Development Unit, Department of Psychology, University College London, UK.
Curr Biol. 2000 Jun 15;10(12):731-4. doi: 10.1016/s0960-9822(00)00540-6.
There is much evidence in primates' visual processing for distinct mechanisms involved in object recognition and encoding object position and motion, which have been identified with 'ventral' and 'dorsal' streams, respectively, of the extra-striate visual areas [1] [2] [3]. This distinction may yield insights into normal human perception, its development and pathology. Motion coherence sensitivity has been taken as a test of global processing in the dorsal stream [4] [5]. We have proposed an analogous 'form coherence' measure of global processing in the ventral stream [6]. In a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) experiment, we found that the cortical regions activated by form coherence did not overlap with those activated by motion coherence in the same individuals. Areas differentially activated by form coherence included regions in the middle occipital gyrus, the ventral occipital surface, the intraparietal sulcus, and the temporal lobe. Motion coherence activated areas consistent with those previously identified as V5 and V3a, the ventral occipital surface, the intraparietal sulcus, and temporal structures. Neither form nor motion coherence activated area V1 differentially. Form and motion foci in occipital, parietal, and temporal areas were nearby but showed almost no overlap. These results support the idea that form and motion coherence test distinct functional brain systems, but that these do not necessarily correspond to a gross anatomical separation of dorsal and ventral processing streams.
在灵长类动物的视觉处理过程中,有大量证据表明存在不同的机制参与物体识别以及对物体位置和运动的编码,这些机制分别与纹外视觉区域的“腹侧”和“背侧”通路相关[1][2][3]。这种区分可能有助于深入了解正常人类的感知、其发展过程及病理学。运动连贯性敏感性已被用作检测背侧通路中全局处理能力的指标[4][5]。我们提出了一种类似的用于检测腹侧通路中全局处理能力的“形状连贯性”指标[6]。在一项功能磁共振成像(fMRI)实验中,我们发现,在同一个体中,由形状连贯性激活的皮质区域与由运动连贯性激活的区域并不重叠。由形状连贯性差异激活的区域包括枕中回、枕叶腹侧表面、顶内沟和颞叶中的区域。运动连贯性激活的区域与先前确定为V5和V3a的区域一致,还有枕叶腹侧表面、顶内沟和颞叶结构。形状连贯性和运动连贯性均未对V1区域产生差异激活。枕叶、顶叶和颞叶区域中的形状和运动焦点彼此相邻,但几乎没有重叠。这些结果支持了这样一种观点,即形状连贯性和运动连贯性检测的是不同的功能性脑系统,但这些系统不一定对应于背侧和腹侧处理通路在大体解剖学上的分离。