Extended Data Fig. 10: Bipartite receptive field cannot be explained by the center-surround structure.
From: Functional bipartite invariance in mouse primary visual cortex receptive fields
a, Example MEIs overlaid with their overall boundaries (blue), ‘Minimum Response Field’ (MRF) boundaries (green), and variable subfield boundaries (red) for visualization. b, Histogram of MEI, MRF, and variable subfield diameters. The mean diameters of MEI, MRF, and variable subfield across all neurons were (mean ± s.e.m.): 32.9 ± 0.02, 20.6 ± 0.01, 23.3 ± 0.02 degrees. c, The fixed subfield was located further from the MRF than variable subfield, as quantified by the mean pairwise distance between the MRF and each of the two subfields (two-sided Wilcoxon signed-rank test, W = 14278, P = 5.1 × 10−16). d, However, the fixed subfield overlapped more with the MRF than the variable subfield (two-sided Wilcoxon signed-rank test, W = 24373, P = 0.01; median = 27.1% and 25.1%, respectively). Data were pooled over 340 neurons from two mice.
