Table 2.

Summary of the effects of various experimental manipulations on cortical receptive field size and fast synchronization

Experimental manipulation	Receptive field size	Fast synchrony	Reference
RF plasticity predicts change in synchrony
ICMS	↑	↑	Dinse et al. (1993), Maldonado and Gerstein (1996)
Artificial Scotoma	↑	↑	Das and Gilbert (1995)
Hearing loss	↑	↑	Rajan (2000), Norena and Eggermont (2003), Seki and Eggermont (2002, 2003)
NB + 9 kHz Train	↑	↑	Kilgard and Merzenich (1998), current study
Anesthesia	↓	↓	van der Togt et al. (1998)
NB + multi frequency	↓	↓	Kilgard and Merzenich (1998), Kilgard et al. (2001), current study
RF plasticity does not predict change in synchrony
Attention	↓	↑	Gassanov et al. (1985), Sakurai (1993), Vaadia et al. (1995), Luck et al. (1997), Steinmetz et al. (2000), Schoenbaum et al. (2000)
Training	↓	↑	Schieber (2002), Salazai et al. (2004)
Kindling	↓	↑	Valentine et al. (2004)
NB + noise train	↑	↓	Bao et al. (2003)
Amblyopia	↑	↓	Konig et al. (1993), Swindale and Mitchell (1994), Roelfsema et al. (1994)
Enrichment	–	↑	Engineer et al. (2004), current study
VTA + tone	↑	–	Bao et al. (2001)
NB + multi trains	↑	–	Kilgard et al. (2001), current study

Thick lines group experiments by similarity of effects. These results indicate that many factors influence cortical synchronization independent of receptive field reorganization. In many cases, the changes in receptive field size and synchronization were quantified in different studies.