On short timescales, RSC, but not the PPA, adapts

to repeated presentations of the same scene from different viewpoints (Epstein et al., 2003, Epstein et al., 2008 and Park and Chun, 2009). These results, combined with the general scene selectivity of these regions, have led some to suggest that the PPA, or a portion thereof, might encode viewpoint-specific information about spatial boundaries within a scene, while RSC might encode viewpoint-invariant information (Epstein, 2008). However, several lines of evidence suggest that selleck chemicals visual representations in the PPA are more complex. First, the PPA is more strongly activated when subjects attend to texture and material properties of presented objects than when subjects attend to shape, suggesting that the region may also contain

representations of these qualities (Cant and Goodale, 2011). Second, while TOS and RSC are released from adaptation by presentation of mirror-reversed scenes, the PPA is not, even though such mirror reversal produces large changes in the location of spatial boundaries (Dilks et al., 2011). Finally, while spatial layout can be decoded from activation patterns in both the PPA and RSC, the voxel response patterns in the PPA also provide significant information about object identity (Harel et al., 2013). While these findings form the basis of our current understanding of the neural mechanisms of scene processing, fMRI adaptation and multivoxel pattern analysis do not necessarily reflect the selectivity Veliparib mw of individual neurons (Sawamura et al., 2006). Thus, the accuracy with which these results reflect information processing in scene areas remains unclear. Because humans and nonhuman primates have similar visual systems, it is natural to ask whether nonhuman primates also possess visual areas that respond selectively to stimuli that represent spatial layout. Given our past success in combining fMRI, electrophysiology,

and microstimulation to understand the macaque face-processing system (Freiwald and Tsao, 2010, Freiwald et al., 2009, Moeller et al., 2008 and Tsao et al., 2006), we sought to localize and record from macaque scene-selective areas and characterize the properties of cells within these regions in order to Electron transport chain elucidate the neural mechanisms underlying scene processing. We first performed fMRI of three rhesus macaques while they viewed interleaved blocks of scene, nonscene, and scrambled stimuli (Figure S1A available online). Because our animals receive no exposure to outdoor environments, we restricted our stimuli to familiar and unfamiliar indoor scenes. In all three animals, we found a circumscribed region in the occipitotemporal sulcus anterior to area V4 that responded significantly more strongly to scenes than to nonscene controls, which we term the lateral place patch (LPP) (Figure 1).