Supplementary Figure 4: Receptive field size and cortical magnification vs. eccentricity.
From: Natural image and receptive field statistics predict saccade sizes
(a), RF size (square root of area) versus eccentricity replotted from previous studies (see legend) for macaques (n = 248 RF sizes23), marmosets (n = 597 RF sizes58), and cats (n = 643 RF sizes for individual data points59; mean and standard error for n = 178 RF sizes grouped by eccentricity60). All fits are based on the same function used in Van Essen et al.23 (b), Cortical magnification versus eccentricity replotted from previous studies (see legend). The large plot only shows the fits and the first 10° of eccentricity with linear axes to emphasize the severity of the fall-off. The inset shows all of the data (n = 82 cortical magnification estimates for cats59–61). The fit for cat data was based on the same function used in Chaplin et al.58 (see Online Methods for details).
