Biology subjects

Alexander S Ecker

Publications and source records attributed to Alexander S Ecker.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2015

DataJoint: managing big scientific data using MATLAB or Python

The rise of big data in modern research poses serious challenges for data management: Large and intricate datasets from diverse instrumentation must be precisely aligned, annotated, and processed in a variety of ways to extract new insights. While high levels of data integrity are expected, research teams have diverse backgrounds, are geographically dispersed, and rarely possess a primary interest in data science. Here we describe DataJoint, an open-source toolbox designed for manipulating and processing scientific data under the relational data model. Designed for scientists who need a flexible and expressive database language with few basic concepts and operations, DataJoint facilitates multiuser access, efficient queries, and distributed computing. With implementations in both MATLAB and Python, DataJoint is not limited to particular file formats, acquisition systems, or data modalities and can be quickly adapted to new experimental designs. DataJoint and related resources are available at http://datajoint.github.com.

Bioinformatics↗

bioRxiv2015

Faster processing of moving compared to flashed bars in awake macaque V1 provides a neural correlate of the flash lag illusion

When the brain has determined the position of a moving object, due to anatomical and processing delays, the object will have already moved to a new location. Given the statistical regularities present in natural motion, the brain may have acquired compensatory mechanisms to minimize the mismatch between the perceived and the real position of a moving object. A well-known visual illusion -- the flash lag effect -- points towards such a possibility. Although many psychophysical models have been suggested to explain this illusion, their predictions have not been tested at the neural level, particularly in a species of animal known to perceive the illusion. Towards this, we recorded neural responses to flashed and moving bars from primary visual cortex (V1) of awake, fixating macaque monkeys. We found that the response latency to moving bars of varying speed, motion direction and luminance was shorter than that to flashes, in a manner that is consistent with psychophysical results. At the level of V1, our results support the differential latency model positing that flashed and moving bars have different latencies. As we found a neural correlate of the illusion in passively fixating monkeys, our results also suggest that judging the instantaneous position of the moving bar at the time of flash -- as required by the postdiction/motion-biasing model -- may not be necessary for observing a neural correlate of the illusion. Our results also suggest that the brain may have evolved mechanisms to process moving stimuli faster and closer to real time compared with briefly appearing stationary stimuli.\n\nNew and NoteworthyWe report several observations in awake macaque V1 that provide support for the differential latency model of the flash lag illusion. We find that the equal latency of flash and moving stimuli as assumed by motion integration/postdiction models does not hold in V1. We show that in macaque V1, motion processing latency depends on stimulus luminance, speed and motion direction in a manner consistent with several psychophysical properties of the flash lag illusion.

Neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2015

On the structure of population activity under fluctuations in attentional state

AbstractAttention is commonly thought to improve behavioral performance by increasing response gain and suppressing shared variability in neuronal populations. However, both the focus and the strength of attention are likely to vary from one experimental trial to the next, thereby inducing response variability unknown to the experimenter. Here we study analytically how fluctuations in attentional state affect the structure of population responses in a simple model of spatial and feature attention. In our model, attention acts on the neural response exclusively by modulating each neurons gain. Neurons are conditionally independent given the stimulus and the attentional gain, and correlated activity arises only from trial-to-trial fluctuations of the attentional state, which are unknown to the experimenter. We find that this simple model can readily explain many aspects of neural response modulation under attention, such as increased response gain, reduced individual and shared variability, increased correlations with firing rates, limited range correlations, and differential correlations. We therefore suggest that attention may act primarily by increasing response gain of individual neurons without affecting their correlation structure. The experimentally observed reduction in correlations may instead result from reduced variability of the attentional gain when a stimulus is attended. Moreover, we show that attentional gain fluctuations - even if unknown to a downstream readout - do not impair the readout accuracy despite inducing limited-range correlations.

Neuroscience↗