016, uncorrected] as well as preference to objective over retinal planar motion [t(11) = 1.83, p = 0.049, uncorrected], with no response modulation by retinal planar motion. V5/MT maintained its weak preference to retinal compared to objective planar motion components [t(14) = 2.01, p = 0.033, uncorrected]. That V6 was able to segregate self-induced 2D motion components during exposure to 3D flow corroborates the suggestion that V6 in particular is specialized in high-level motion processing, involving 3D as well as object- and self-motion

estimation (Cardin and Smith, 2010, Cardin and Smith, 2011 and Pitzalis et al., 2010). The prior experiments examined conditions where www.selleckchem.com/products/Gemcitabine-Hydrochloride(Gemzar).html objective planar motion and pursuit were either matched in velocity, or where one of them was absent. We have not yet examined how V3A and V6 respond to planar objective motion when pursuit eye movements

and planar objective motion are both present but differ in velocity, inducing retinal motion that is neither fully self-induced nor fully equivalent to objective motion. To answer this question and to extend the findings of experiment 2, we performed the final experiment 4. It contained the same four conditions as experiment 2 (pursuit and objective planar motion with 0% or 100% velocity each), plus four additional conditions: objective planar motion with 50% and 150% velocity during fixation [i.e., (−/+50%) and (−/+150%), respectively], and objective planar motion with 50% and 150% velocity during 100% pursuit velocity [i.e., (+/+50%) and (+/+150%), respectively] (illustrated in Figure 7A). Note that in the latter two conditions, MycoClean Mycoplasma Removal Kit the direction of IBET151 pursuit and objective motion were the same, such that the two differed in speed by 50% at all times. These latter conditions are of primary interest in this experiment because both were matched in pursuit (100% pursuit velocity) and in retinal motion (50% retinal motion velocity), yet differed in objective motion velocity

(50% and 150%, respectively). We expected regions that respond only to retinal motion to be equally activated by (+/+50%) and (+/+150%) (both contain 50% retinal motion), but regions responsive to objective planar motion velocity to differentiate between (+/+50%) and (+/+150%) conditions. Figures 7B and 7C show that only V3A and V6 differentiated between (+/+150%) and (+/+50%), with higher responses to (+/+150%) [V3A: t(12) = 3.13, p = 0.029; V6: t(9) = 3.20, p = 0.038, both Bonferroni corrected for six comparisons]. In contrast, V5/MT (and MST) responded equally to (+/+150%) and (+/+50%), with higher responses compared to (+/+), indicating that V5+/MT+ was primarily driven by retinal motion during pursuit. In the corresponding set of conditions during fixation [i.e., (−/+50%) and (−/+150%), respectively], V5/MT (as well as V3A and V6) significantly differentiated between velocities (Figures S5A and S5B).