Figure 4

Orientation tuning stability is independent of spatial frequency tuning stability. (A) Magnitude of change between Session1 and Session2 in preferred orientation versus orientation bandwidth, Spearman’s Rank correlation r = 0.330, p = 2.85e-5. Data are plotted on a logarithmic scale to more clearly visualize individual data points. (B) Magnitude of change between Session1 and Session2 in preferred orientation versus preferred spatial frequency, Spearman’s Rank correlation r = 0.103, p = 0.205. Data are plotted on a logarithmic scale to more clearly visualize individual data points. (C) Summary of correlations among differences in the 4 tuning parameters measured. In addition to the relationships described in (A,B), the difference in preferred spatial frequency was positively correlated to the difference in spatial frequency bandwidth (Spearman’s Rank Correlation r = 0.397, p = 3.43e-7), but the difference in orientation bandwidth was not correlated with the difference in spatial frequency bandwidth (Spearman’s Rank Correlation r = −0.125, p = 0.122). (D) Gaussian tuning of 6 example neurons, ranked by magnitude of change in orientation preference. Blue numbers indicate the change in preferred orientation, gray numbers indicate the change in preferred spatial frequency. For the three neurons with the largest shift in preferred orientation (left, rank 154–152), the neuron with the largest shift in preferred orientation also showed a large shift in the preferred spatial frequency, whereas the two neurons with the next largest shifts in preferred orientation did not show a large change in preferred spatial frequency. For neurons with the smallest shift in orientation (right, rank 1–3), one neuron showed a considerable shift in the preferred spatial frequency (second row).