scholarly journals Supplementary Eye Fields☆

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Z.M. Abzug ◽  
M.A. Sommer
Keyword(s):  
Supplementary Eye Fields

Neuronal activity related to visually guided saccades in the frontal eye fields of rhesus monkeys: comparison with supplementary eye fields

1991 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 559-579 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. D. Schall
Keyword(s):  
Rhesus Monkeys ◽  
Time Course ◽  
Receptive Fields ◽  
Peak Level ◽  
Frontal Eye Fields ◽  
Visually Guided ◽  
Visual Cells ◽  
Preparatory Set ◽  
Functional Classes ◽  
Supplementary Eye Fields

1. The purpose of this study was to analyze the response properties of neurons in the frontal eye fields (FEF) of rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) and to compare and contrast the various functional classes with those recorded in the supplementary eye fields (SEF) of the same animals performing the same go/no-go visual tracking task. Three hundred ten cells recorded in FEF provided the data for this investigation. 2. Visual cells in FEF responded to the stimuli that guided the eye movements. The visual cells in FEF responded with a slightly shorter latency and were more consistent and phasic in their activation than their counterparts in SEF. The receptive fields tended to emphasize the contralateral hemifield to the same extent as those observed in SEF visual cells. 3. Preparatory set cells began to discharge after the presentation of the target and ceased firing before the saccade, after the go/no-go cue was given. These neurons comprised a smaller proportion in FEF than in SEF. In contrast to their counterparts in SEF, the preparatory set cells in FEF did not respond preferentially in relation to contralateral movements, even though most responded preferentially for movements in one particular direction. The time course of the discharge of the FEF set cells was similar to that of their SEF counterparts, except that they reached their peak level of activation sooner. The few preparatory set cells in FEF tested with both auditory and visual stimuli tended to respond preferentially to the visual targets, whereas, in contrast, most set cells in SEF were bimodal. 4. Sensory-movement cells represented the largest population of cells recorded in FEF, responding in relation to both the presentation of the targets and the execution of the saccade. Although some of these sensory-movement cells resembled their counterparts in SEF by exhibiting a sustained elevation of activity, most of the FEF sensory-movement cells gave two discrete bursts, one after the presentation of the target and another before and during the saccade. Like their counterparts in SEF, the sensory-movement cells tended to be tuned for saccades into the contralateral hemifield, but this tendency was more pronounced in FEF than in SEF. The FEF sensory-movement cells discharged more briskly, with a shorter latency relative to the presentation of the target, than their counterparts in SEF. In addition, the FEF sensory-movement neurons reached their peak activation sooner than SEF sensory-movement neurons. Most FEF sensory-movement cells exhibited different patterns of activation in response to visual and auditory targets.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

scholarly journals Frames of Reference for Eye-Head Gaze Commands in Primate Supplementary Eye Fields

Neuron ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 1057-1066 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julio C. Martinez-Trujillo ◽  
W.Pieter Medendorp ◽  
Hongying Wang ◽  
J.Douglas Crawford
Keyword(s):  
Frames Of Reference ◽  
Supplementary Eye Fields

Localization of the Supplementary Eye Fields in humans : a fMRI approach

NeuroImage ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. S987
Author(s):  
M.-H. Grosbras ◽  
E. Lobel ◽  
D. Le Bihan ◽  
A. Berthoz
Keyword(s):  
Supplementary Eye Fields

Contribution of Head Movement to Gaze Command Coding in Monkey Frontal Cortex and Superior Colliculus

2003 ◽  
Vol 90 (4) ◽  
pp. 2770-2776 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julio C. Martinez-Trujillo ◽  
Eliana M. Klier ◽  
Hongying Wang ◽  
J. Douglas Crawford
Keyword(s):  
Superior Colliculus ◽  
Neural Control ◽  
Significant Contribution ◽  
Head Movements ◽  
Vector Model ◽  
Gaze Control ◽  
Gaze Shift ◽  
Visual Model ◽  
The Gaze ◽  
Supplementary Eye Fields

Most of what we know about the neural control of gaze comes from experiments in head-fixed animals, but several “head-free” studies have suggested that fixing the head dramatically alters the apparent gaze command. We directly investigated this issue by quantitatively comparing head-fixed and head-free gaze trajectories evoked by electrically stimulating 52 sites in the superior colliculus (SC) of two monkeys and 23 sites in the supplementary eye fields (SEF) of two other monkeys. We found that head movements made a significant contribution to gaze shifts evoked from both neural structures. In the majority of the stimulated sites, average gaze amplitude was significantly larger and individual gaze trajectories were significantly less convergent in space with the head free to move. Our results are consistent with the hypothesis that head-fixed stimulation only reveals the oculomotor component of the gaze shift, not the true, planned goal of the movement. One implication of this finding is that when comparing stimulation data against popular gaze control models, freeing the head shifts the apparent coding of gaze away from a “spatial code” toward a simpler visual model in the SC and toward an eye-centered or fixed-vector model representation in the SEF.

scholarly journals Electrical Stimulation of the Supplementary Eye Fields in the Head-Free Macaque Evokes Kinematically Normal Gaze Shifts

2003 ◽  
Vol 89 (6) ◽  
pp. 2961-2974 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julio C. Martinez-Trujillo ◽  
Hongying Wang ◽  
J. Douglas Crawford
Keyword(s):  
Temporal Structure ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Head Movements ◽  
Average Amplitude ◽  
Gaze Shifts ◽  
Velocity Amplitude ◽  
High Level ◽  
Head Rotations ◽  
Supplementary Eye Fields ◽  
Stimulation Of

The supplementary eye fields (SEFs), located on the dorsomedial surface of the frontal cortex, are involved in high-level aspects of saccade generation. Some reports suggest that the same area could also be involved in the generation of motor commands for the head. If so, it is important to establish whether this structure encodes eye and head commands separately or gaze commands that give rise to coordinated eye-head movements. Here we systematically stimulated (50 μA, 300 Hz, 200 ms) the SEF of two head-free (head unrestrained) macaques while recording three-dimensional eye and head rotations. A total of 55 sites were found to consistently elicit saccade-like gaze movements, always in the contralateral direction with variable vertical components, and ranging in average amplitude from 5 to 60°. These movements were always a combination of eye-in-head saccades and head-in-space movements. We then performed a comparison between these movements and natural gaze shifts. The kinematics of the elicited movements (i.e., their temporal structure, their velocity-amplitude relationships, and the relative contributions of the eye and the head as a function of movement amplitude) were indistinguishable from those of natural gaze shifts. Additionally, they obeyed the same three-dimensional constraints as natural gaze shifts (i.e., eye-in-head movements obeyed Listing's law, whereas head- and eye-in-space movements obeyed Donders' law). In summary, gaze movements evoked by stimulating the SEF were indistinguishable from natural coordinated eye-head gaze shifts. Based on this we conclude that the SEF explicitly encodes gaze and that the kinematics aspects of eye-head coordination are implicitly specified by mechanisms downstream from the SEF.

scholarly journals Stopping smooth pursuit

2017 ◽  
Vol 372 (1718) ◽  
pp. 20160200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus Missal ◽  
Stephen J. Heinen
Keyword(s):  
Smooth Pursuit ◽  
Neural Control ◽  
Inhibitory Neurons ◽  
Image Motion ◽  
Visual Object ◽  
Passive Response ◽  
Eye Velocity ◽  
Supplementary Eye Fields ◽  
Omnipause Neurons

If a visual object of interest suddenly starts to move, we will try to follow it with a smooth movement of the eyes. This smooth pursuit response aims to reduce image motion on the retina that could blur visual perception. In recent years, our knowledge of the neural control of smooth pursuit initiation has sharply increased. However, stopping smooth pursuit eye movements is less well understood and will be discussed in this paper. The most straightforward way to study smooth pursuit stopping is by interrupting image motion on the retina. This causes eye velocity to decay exponentially towards zero. However, smooth pursuit stopping is not a passive response, as shown by behavioural and electrophysiological evidence. Moreover, smooth pursuit stopping is particularly influenced by active prediction of the upcoming end of the target. Here, we suggest that a particular class of inhibitory neurons of the brainstem, the omnipause neurons, could play a central role in pursuit stopping. Furthermore, the role of supplementary eye fields of the frontal cortex in smooth pursuit stopping is also discussed. This article is part of the themed issue ‘Movement suppression: brain mechanisms for stopping and stillness’.

scholarly journals A Neural Representation of Sequential States Within an Instructed Task

2010 ◽  
Vol 104 (5) ◽  
pp. 2831-2849 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Campos ◽  
Boris Breznen ◽  
Richard A. Andersen
Keyword(s):  
Internal Representation ◽  
Neural Representation ◽  
Neural Basis ◽  
Lateral Intraparietal Area ◽  
State Dependent ◽  
Sensorimotor Transformations ◽  
Saccade Task ◽  
Anticipatory Activity ◽  
Supplementary Eye Fields ◽  
The Brain

In the study of the neural basis of sensorimotor transformations, it has become clear that the brain does not always wait to sense external events and afterward select the appropriate responses. If there are predictable regularities in the environment, the brain begins to anticipate the timing of instructional cues and the signals to execute a response, revealing an internal representation of the sequential behavioral states of the task being performed. To investigate neural mechanisms that could represent the sequential states of a task, we recorded neural activity from two oculomotor structures implicated in behavioral timing—the supplementary eye fields (SEF) and the lateral intraparietal area (LIP)—while rhesus monkeys performed a memory-guided saccade task. The neurons of the SEF were found to collectively encode the progression of the task with individual neurons predicting and/or detecting states or transitions between states. LIP neurons, while also encoding information about the current temporal interval, were limited with respect to SEF neurons in two ways. First, LIP neurons tended to be active when the monkey was planning a saccade but not in the precue or intertrial intervals, whereas SEF neurons tended to have activity modulation in all intervals. Second, the LIP neurons were more likely to be spatially tuned than SEF neurons. SEF neurons also show anticipatory activity. The state-selective and anticipatory responses of SEF neurons support two complementary models of behavioral timing, state dependent and accumulator models, and suggest that each model describes a contribution SEF makes to timing at different temporal resolutions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document