H. Autrum

Hansjochem Autrum

E. Hadorn

A. Kühn

E. Mayr

A. Pirson

J. Straub

H. Stubbe

W. Weidel

E. Bünning

K. v. Frisch

Ergebnisse der Biologie

J. Stone

P. O. Bishop

V. Braitenberg

K. L. Chow

R. L. De Valois

R. B. Freeman

W. A. van de Grind

O.-J. Grüsser

U. Grüsser-Cornehls

R. Jung

W. R. Levick

H.-U. Lunkenheimer

D. M. MacKay

M. Snyder

N. J. Strausfeld

I. Thomas

The present volume covers the physiology of the visual system beyond the optic nerve. It is a continuation of the two preceding parts on the photochemistry and the physiology of the eye, and forms a bridge from them to the fourth part on visual psychophysics. These fields have all developed as independent speciali ties and need integrating with each other. The processing of visual information in the brain cannot be understood without some knowledge of the preceding mechanisms in the photoreceptor organs. There are two fundamental reasons, ontogenetic and functional, why this is so: 1) the retina of the vertebrate eye has developed from a specialized part of the brain; 2) in processing their data the eyes follow physiological principles similar to the visual brain centres. Peripheral and central functions should also be discussed in context with their final synthesis in subjective experience, i. e. visual perception. Microphysiology and ultramicroscopy have brought new insights into the neuronal basis of vision. These investigations began in the periphery: HARTLINE'S pioneering experiments on single visual elements of Limulus in 1932 started a successful period of neuronal recordings which ascended from the retina to the highest centres in the visual brain. In the last two decades modern electron microscopic techniques and photochemical investigations of single photoreceptors further contributed to vision research.

Central Processing of Visual Information A: Integrative Functions and Comparative Data

L.M. Beidler

H. Davis

H. Engström

G.A. Fry

R. Granit

W.D. Keidel

D.R. Kenshalo

O. Lowenstein

C. Pfaffmann

L.A. Riggs

D. Schneider

T. Tomita

W.D. Wright

J.J. Zwislocki

When seen from an outsider's vantage point, the development of knowledge in the sensory sciences must appear massive and the result of some carefully followed master plan. In reality, it is the result of numerous relatively independent human endeavors shaped by application of the scientific method. The comprehensive construction of quantitative theories of sense organ function has occurred only recently -but at an explosive rate prefaced by centuries of expansion in the physical sciences. Predicated on this growth, the twentieth century may become known as the age of the biological sciences. With the exception of a modest number of intellectual giants, there were few contributors to the foundations of the sensory sciences before the dawn of this century. At least 90% of existing knowledge has been produced by scientists working in laboratories founded since 1920. If any single scientist and his laboratory may be identified with the growth in the sensory sciences, it is EDGAR DOUGLAS ADRIAN, First Baron of Cambridge and leader of the Physiological Laboratory at Cambridge University, England. Lord ADRIAN'S influence upon the sensory sciences was great, not only in terms of his contribution to knowledge itself but also through the influence which he exerted upon numerous young scientists who spent weeks or years at the Cambridge laboratory and who later returned to their homelands and colleagues with the seeds of vigorous research and quantitative inquiry firmly implanted.

Foundations of Sensory Science

P. Kunze

M. Heisenberg

M. Yoshida

B. Diehn

M. Järviletho

A. W. Snyder

D. G. Stavenga

W. H. Miller

R. Menzel

K. Hamdorf

M. F. Bennet

In the comparative physiology of photoreception by the Protista and the invertebrates two aspects are emphasized: (1) the diversity of visual processes in these groups and (2) their bearing upon general mechanisms of photoreception. Invertebrates have evolved a far greater variety of adaptations than vertebrates modifications aiding survival in the remarkably different biotopes they occupy. The number of species in itself suggests this multiformity; each of them has peculiarities of its own, in morphology as well as in physiology and behavior. But these special adaptations are variations on a few great themes. Although the catalogue of invertebrate species is immense, the literature concerning them nearly rivals it in extent-even if one considers only that fraction dealing with visual physiology. Taxonomy proceeds by grouping the species, categorizing them in genera, families, orders, and progressively larger units. Similarly, comparative physiology aims at an analogous, more or less compre hensive, classification. This Part A of Volume VII/6, like Part B that follows it, emphasizes the broad questions that concern groups larger than the individual species; in some cases these questions have general applicability. The middle course between approaches that are too specialized and those that are too general is often elusive, but here we attempt to follow it. The vast number of special adaptations-probably, as we have said, as large as the number of species-is beyond the range even of a handbook.

A: Invertebrate Photoreceptors

Comparative Physiology and Evolution of Vision in Invertebrates

H. Autrum

Books

Your next favorite book is out there