Accuracy of Rats in Discriminating Visual Objects Is Explained by the Complexity of Their Perceptual Strategy

Current Biology

Volumn 28, Issue 7, 2018, Pages 1005-1015.e5

  Djurdjevic, Vladimir ^a   Ansuini, Alessio ^a   Bertolini, Daniele ^a   Macke, Jakob H ^b,c   Zoccolan, Davide ^a  

^a SISSA   (Italy)

^b CENTER OF ADVANCED EUROPEAN STUDIES AND RESEARCH CAESAR   (Germany)

^c DARMSTADT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

classification; filtering; image; object; perception; processing; recognition; rodent; shape; vision

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; LONG EVANS RAT; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; RAT; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION; VISION; VISUAL SYSTEM;

ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FORM PERCEPTION; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; RATS; RATS, LONG-EVANS; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL PATHWAYS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 85044577205     PISSN: 09609822     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2018.02.037     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Niell, C.M., Cell types, circuits, and receptive fields in the mouse visual cortex. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 38 (2015), 413–431.
2. Huberman, A.D., Niell, C.M., What can mice tell us about how vision works?. Trends Neurosci. 34 (2011), 464–473.
3. Gavornik, J.P., Bear, M.F., Higher brain functions served by the lowly rodent primary visual cortex. Learn. Mem. 21 (2014), 527–533.
4. Glickfeld, L.L., Reid, R.C., Andermann, M.L., A mouse model of higher visual cortical function. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 24 (2014), 28–33.
5. Carandini, M., Churchland, A.K., Probing perceptual decisions in rodents. Nat. Neurosci. 16 (2013), 824–831.
6. Katzner, S., Weigelt, S., Visual cortical networks: of mice and men. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 23 (2013), 202–206.
7. Zoccolan, D., Invariant visual object recognition and shape processing in rats. Behav. Brain Res. 285 (2015), 10–33.
8. Reinagel, P., Using rats for vision research. Neuroscience 296 (2015), 75–79.
9. Histed, M.H., Carvalho, L.A., Maunsell, J.H.R., Psychophysical measurement of contrast sensitivity in the behaving mouse. J. Neurophysiol. 107 (2012), 758–765.
10. Busse, L., Ayaz, A., Dhruv, N.T., Katzner, S., Saleem, A.B., Schölvinck, M.L., Zaharia, A.D., Carandini, M., The detection of visual contrast in the behaving mouse. J. Neurosci. 31 (2011), 11351–11361.
11. Zoccolan, D., Oertelt, N., DiCarlo, J.J., Cox, D.D., A rodent model for the study of invariant visual object recognition. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106 (2009), 8748–8753.
12. Alemi-Neissi, A., Rosselli, F.B., Zoccolan, D., Multifeatural shape processing in rats engaged in invariant visual object recognition. J. Neurosci. 33 (2013), 5939–5956.
13. Tafazoli, S., Di Filippo, A., Zoccolan, D., Transformation-tolerant object recognition in rats revealed by visual priming. J. Neurosci. 32 (2012), 21–34.
14. Rosselli, F.B., Alemi, A., Ansuini, A., Zoccolan, D., Object similarity affects the perceptual strategy underlying invariant visual object recognition in rats. Front. Neural Circuits, 9, 2015, 10.
15. Vermaercke, B., Op de Beeck, H.P., A multivariate approach reveals the behavioral templates underlying visual discrimination in rats. Curr. Biol. 22 (2012), 50–55.
16. Meier, P., Flister, E., Reinagel, P., Collinear features impair visual detection by rats. J. Vis., 11, 2011, 22.
17. Bossens, C., Op de Beeck, H.P., Linear and non-linear visual feature learning in rat and humans. Front. Behav. Neurosci., 10, 2016, 235.
18. Minini, L., Jeffery, K.J., Do rats use shape to solve “shape discriminations”?. Learn. Mem. 13 (2006), 287–297.
19. Brooks, D.I., Ng, K.H., Buss, E.W., Marshall, A.T., Freeman, J.H., Wasserman, E.A., Categorization of photographic images by rats using shape-based image dimensions. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 39 (2013), 85–92.
20. Raposo, D., Sheppard, J.P., Schrater, P.R., Churchland, A.K., Multisensory decision-making in rats and humans. J. Neurosci. 32 (2012), 3726–3735.
21. Raposo, D., Kaufman, M.T., Churchland, A.K., A category-free neural population supports evolving demands during decision-making. Nat. Neurosci. 17 (2014), 1784–1792.
22. Sheppard, J.P., Raposo, D., Churchland, A.K., Dynamic weighting of multisensory stimuli shapes decision-making in rats and humans. J. Vis., 13, 2013, 4.
23. Licata, A.M., Kaufman, M.T., Raposo, D., Ryan, M.B., Sheppard, J.P., Churchland, A.K., Posterior parietal cortex guides visual decisions in rats. J. Neurosci. 37 (2017), 4954–4966.
24. De Franceschi, G., Vivattanasarn, T., Saleem, A.B., Solomon, S.G., Vision guides selection of freeze or flight defense strategies in mice. Curr. Biol. 26 (2016), 2150–2154.
25. Yilmaz, M., Meister, M., Rapid innate defensive responses of mice to looming visual stimuli. Curr. Biol. 23 (2013), 2011–2015.
26. Wallace, D.J., Greenberg, D.S., Sawinski, J., Rulla, S., Notaro, G., Kerr, J.N.D., Rats maintain an overhead binocular field at the expense of constant fusion. Nature 498 (2013), 65–69.
27. Prusky, G.T., Harker, K.T., Douglas, R.M., Whishaw, I.Q., Variation in visual acuity within pigmented, and between pigmented and albino rat strains. Behav. Brain Res. 136 (2002), 339–348.
28. Keller, J., Strasburger, H., Cerutti, D.T., Sabel, B.A., Assessing spatial vision—automated measurement of the contrast-sensitivity function in the hooded rat. J. Neurosci. Methods 97 (2000), 103–110.
29. Murray, R.F., Classification images: a review. J. Vis., 11, 2011, 2.
30. Macke, J.H., Wichmann, F.A., Estimating predictive stimulus features from psychophysical data: the decision image technique applied to human faces. J. Vis., 10, 2010, 22.
31. DiCarlo, J.J., Zoccolan, D., Rust, N.C., How does the brain solve visual object recognition?. Neuron 73 (2012), 415–434.
32. LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., Hinton, G., Deep learning. Nature 521 (2015), 436–444.
33. Riesenhuber, M., Poggio, T., Models of object recognition. Nat. Neurosci. 3:Suppl (2000), 1199–1204.
34. Gosselin, F., Schyns, P.G., Bubbles: a technique to reveal the use of information in recognition tasks. Vision Res. 41 (2001), 2261–2271.
35. Gibson, B.M., Wasserman, E.A., Gosselin, F., Schyns, P.G., Applying Bubbles to localize features that control pigeons’ visual discrimination behavior. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 31 (2005), 376–382.
36. Gibson, B.M., Lazareva, O.F., Gosselin, F., Schyns, P.G., Wasserman, E.A., Nonaccidental properties underlie shape recognition in mammalian and nonmammalian vision. Curr. Biol. 17 (2007), 336–340.
37. Delis, I., Chen, C., Jack, R.E., Garrod, O.G.B., Panzeri, S., Schyns, P.G., Space-by-time manifold representation of dynamic facial expressions for emotion categorization. J. Vis., 16, 2016, 14.
38. Jack, R.E., Garrod, O.G.B., Schyns, P.G., Dynamic facial expressions of emotion transmit an evolving hierarchy of signals over time. Curr. Biol. 24 (2014), 187–192.
39. Olman, C., Kersten, D., Classification objects, ideal observers & generative models. Cogn. Sci. 28 (2004), 227–239.
40. Jack, R.E., Garrod, O.G.B., Yu, H., Caldara, R., Schyns, P.G., Facial expressions of emotion are not culturally universal. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109 (2012), 7241–7244.
41. Pritchett, L.M., Murray, R.F., Classification images reveal decision variables and strategies in forced choice tasks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112 (2015), 7321–7326.
42. Neri, P., Object segmentation controls image reconstruction from natural scenes. PLoS Biol., 15, 2017, e1002611.
43. Smith, M.L., Gosselin, F., Schyns, P.G., Measuring internal representations from behavioral and brain data. Curr. Biol. 22 (2012), 191–196.
44. Ince, R.A.A., van Rijsbergen, N.J., Thut, G., Rousselet, G.A., Gross, J., Panzeri, S., Schyns, P.G., Tracing the flow of perceptual features in an algorithmic brain network. Sci. Rep., 5, 2015, 17681.
45. Rousselet, G.A., Ince, R.A.A., van Rijsbergen, N.J., Schyns, P.G., Eye coding mechanisms in early human face event-related potentials. J. Vis., 14, 2014, 7.
46. Ince, R.A.A., Jaworska, K., Gross, J., Panzeri, S., van Rijsbergen, N.J., Rousselet, G.A., Schyns, P.G., The deceptively simple N170 reflects network information processing mechanisms involving visual feature coding and transfer across hemispheres. Cereb. Cortex 26 (2016), 4123–4135.
47. Popivanov, I.D., Schyns, P.G., Vogels, R., Stimulus features coded by single neurons of a macaque body category selective patch. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 113 (2016), E2450–E2459.
48. Chelazzi, L., Rossi, F., Tempia, F., Ghirardi, M., Strata, P., Saccadic eye movements and gaze holding in the head-restrained pigmented rat. Eur. J. Neurosci. 1 (1989), 639–646.
49. Zoccolan, D., Graham, B.J., Cox, D.D., A self-calibrating, camera-based eye tracker for the recording of rodent eye movements. Front. Neurosci., 4, 2010, 193.
50. Tafazoli, S., Safaai, H., De Franceschi, G., Rosselli, F.B., Vanzella, W., Riggi, M., Buffolo, F., Panzeri, S., Zoccolan, D., Emergence of transformation-tolerant representations of visual objects in rat lateral extrastriate cortex. eLife, 6, 2017, e22794.
51. Bishop, C., Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. 2006, Springer-Verlag.