9% (20.4%) for pairs with similar orientation preferences and 31.0% (21.5%) for pairs with different orientation preferences. To distinguish the different effects of visual stimulation on low- versus high-frequency signals, we computed the cross-correlation after

either high-pass or low-pass filtering Vm (Figures 4B and 4C). The reduction in Figure 4A was clearly confined to the low-frequency components (Figure 4C), whereas at high frequencies, for most pairs (37/44), visual stimulation either increased or had no effect on the selleck kinase inhibitor correlation (Figure 4B). As expected, the width of the cross-correlation of the unfiltered Vm decreased in the presence of a visual stimulus (not shown). To illustrate the spectral structure of Vm synchrony, we computed the coherence spectra of spontaneous and visually evoked activity for each pair and plotted the results in color maps (Figures 4D–4F). Each column represents the coherence spectrum of a distinct pair, presented in order of increasing difference in orientation preference between the cells (Figure 4G). The color maps show coherence of spontaneous activity (Figure 4D) and coherence during effective visual stimulation (Figure 4E). this website The difference between these two conditions (Figure 4F) was calculated from the Fisher-transformed coherence (Z; see Experimental Procedures). In Figure 4H, the change in coherence

averaged over the low-frequency (0–10 Hz) or high-frequency (20–80 Hz) range is plotted against difference in preferred orientation. In Figure 4I, the average change in coherence for the high-frequency band is plotted against that for the low-frequency band. In agreement with the results from the cross-correlation analysis in Figures 4A–4C, the overall effect of visual stimulation was to decrease L-NAME HCl the coherence at low frequencies (Figure 4F, cool colors), and increase the coherence at high frequencies (warm colors). A decrease in coherence at low frequencies occurred in most pairs (41/44), independent of orientation (Figure 4H, lower panel). An increase in coherence at high frequencies occurred primarily in

pairs with difference of orientation preference between 0° and 50° (Figure 4H, upper panel). The two effects—on low- and high-frequency coherence—were not significantly correlated with each other across the population (Figure 4I). Note that the effect of visual stimulation occurred on top of the resting coherence in spontaneous activity, which was itself not dependent on the relative orientation preference (Figure 4D). Visual stimulation then either increased the high-frequency coherence, or left it largely unchanged (e.g., Figure S4) for most pairs (41/44). We asked whether (and how) the visually evoked change in Vm synchrony depended on the change in Vm power. We therefore plotted the mean visually evoked change in coherence against the mean change in Vm power for low frequencies (Figure 5A) and for high frequencies (Figure 5B).