Distinct contrast response functions in striate and extra-striate regions of visual cortex revealed with magnetoencephalography (MEG)

Objective: To spatially and temporally characterise the cortical contrast response function to pattern onset stimuli in humans. Methods: Magnetoencephalography (MEG) was used to investigate the human cortical contrast response function to pattern onset stimuli with high temporal and spatial resolution. A beamformer source reconstruction approach was used to spatially localise and identify the time courses of activity at various visual cortical loci. Results: Consistent with the findings of previous studies, MEG beamformer analysis revealed two simultaneous generators of the pattern onset evoked response. These generators arose from anatomically discrete locations in striate and extra-striate visual cortex. Furthermore, these loci demonstrated notably distinct contrast response functions, with striate cortex increasing approximately linearly with contrast, whilst extra-striate visual cortex followed a saturating function. Conclusions: The generators that underlie the pattern onset visual evoked response arise from two distinct regions in striate and extra-striate visual cortex. Significance: The spatially, temporally and functionally distinct mechanisms of contrast processing within the visual cortex may account for the disparate results observed across earlier studies and assist in elucidating causal mechanisms of aberrant contrast processing in neurological disorders. © 2005 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Extra compensation for inventive employees:is our system equitable, unbiased and motivating?

There is a presumption that invention is good. It provides us with innovative goods, services and ways of doing things leading to greater employment, wealth and health. This article looks at the two recent UK cases regarding statutory extra compensation that may be awarded to employee inventors under the Patents Act 1977. Most universities worldwide and many companies have individual inventor reward schemes. Researchers now work in teams made up of both industry and academic researchers who are often based in different countries where different legal regimes apply. Is leaving the decision to award employees extra financial compensation up to individual companies unfair, unequal and de-motivating? Is having differing legislative systems in different European countries counter productive and a barrier to economic growth? There must be a balance between the inventor and the innovator. Do we have it right and if not what should it be? Legislation: Patents Act 1977 s.39 , s.40 , s.41 Cases: Kelly v GE Healthcare Ltd [2009] EWHC 181 (Pat); [2009] R.P.C. 12 (Ch D (Patents Ct)) Shanks v Unilever Plc [2010] EWCA Civ 1283; [2011] R.P.C. 12 (CA (Civ Div))