@phdthesis{Toepfer2018,
  author    = {Toepfer, Franziska Helene},
  title     = {Component selectivity and multistability in a \(Drosophila\) orientation paradigm using incoherent motion stimuli},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-153346},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Visual information is essential for Drosophila to navigate its environment. The visual system of the fly has been studied for many decades and has yielded many insights about vision in general. However, visual information can be ambiguous and the system processing it needs to be able to cope with that. In this study, the visual orientation behavior of Drosophila is challenged by panoramic incoherent motion stimuli to which the fly can respond in three different, equally adaptive ways. The study is conducted in a well-established setup, the so-called flight simulator (Heisenberg and Wolf, 1993), where the fly can control its visual surroundings in stationary flight with its yaw torque, which is simultaneously recorded. The fly can either use one of two incoherently moving panorama patterns or the integrated motion of both as its reference for straight flight. It is observed that flies use all three of these behavioral alternatives for orientation. Previous models of fly motion vision do not predict a bimodal tuning to incoherent wide-field motion stimuli (Joesch et al., 2008, Borst et al., 1995), however, a recent study on blowflies could suggests that they show component selectivity to the individual moving gratings in a compound plaid stimulus (Saleem et al., 2012). Here, it can be shown that the same bimodal tuning manifests in Drosophila, although the stimuli used are different and most of the experiments are conducted in closed loop. It is found that the extent to which the Drosophila expresses this component selectivity in its orientation behavior, i.e. how often it stabilizes a single panorama pattern instead of the integrated motion of both, depends on two properties of the panorama stimuli, pattern contrast and horizontal pattern element distance. Single pattern stabilization decreases with increasing contrast and increasing pattern element distance. In the latter case, it increases again when there are very few horizontal pattern elements, although that appears to be the result of a lack of rivalry between the patterns due to the low number of pattern elements. Both increased pattern contrast and pattern element distance increase the salience of the single pattern elements. A single element in a compound visual stimulus, like a dot within a dot pattern, can be interpreted as a standalone figure or a part of a bigger unit. Previous studies on Drosophila vision have concentrated on how the fly discriminates a figure from the background (Heisenberg and Wolf, 1984, Bahl et al., 2013, Aptekar et al., 2012), but have hardly touched the question of what qualifies a figure or a background (i.e. a panorama) stimulus as such. In the present study, it is observed that, when exposed to incoherent panoramic motion stimuli, the flies prefer to orient themselves towards the average of the two motions when the panorama stimuli possess strong figure features and towards the single patterns when they do not and single pattern elements are therefore less salient. The above-mentioned plaid stimuli are a well-known multistable percept in human psychophysics. Multistability is a property of higher visual systems and considered an indicator of endogenous activity in vision. As Drosophila expresses behavioral multistability in the IPMP, it is evaluated in this respect. The results show several parallels to human multistable perception. For one, the frequency and duration with which a behavior occurs, can be influenced, but the occurrence of the behaviors is non-deterministic and not coupled to the stimulus. It can also be shown that the switches between behaviors do not stem from a rivalry of the two visual hemispheres of the fly, although monocularity does also influence the likelihood with which the behaviors occur. Secondly, like in human perceptual rivalry, individual flies exhibit strong idiosyncrasies regarding the overall durations they spend with the different behaviors and the frequencies with which they switch between them. Finally, the distribution of the durations between the behavioral switches can be fit to the same function as the distribution of percept durations in human multistable perception, the gamma function, although it has a different shape and therefore also differing parameters. The Drosophila mutant radish, which has been shown to have attention-like deficits (van Swinderen and Brembs, 2010, Koenig et al., 2016a), does also express an altered behavior in the IPMP compared to wildtype flies. As these behavioral alterations resemble effects on multistable perception found in humans suffering from ADHD (Amador-Campos et al., 2015) and perceptual multistability is generally considered to be closely related to attention (Leopold and Logothetis, 1999), attentional processes are also very likely to play a role in the flies' behavior in the IPMP. In conclusion, the visual system of Drosophila is capable disentangle incoherent motion stimuli even if they overlap and cover the entire visual field, i.e. it shows component selectivity of wide-field motion. Whether it uses a single wide-field motion component or the average of two as its reference for straight flight depends on pattern contrast and horizontal pattern element density, which indicates an involvement of a figure-background rivalry. This rivalry and the one between the two wide-field motion components elicit a multistability in the orientation behavior of the fly the temporal dynamics of which partially resemble the temporal dynamics of human multistable perception and which also suggests the involvement of attentional processes.},
  subject      = {Drosophila},
  language  = {en}
}