scholarly journals The neural selection and control of saccades by the frontal eye field

2002 ◽  
Vol 357 (1424) ◽  
pp. 1073-1082 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey D. Schall
Keyword(s):  
Visual Processing ◽  
Effective Area ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Visually Guided ◽  
The Gaze ◽  
Neural Processes ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Neural Selection ◽  
And Control ◽  
Meaningful Stimuli

Recent research has provided new insights into the neural processes that select the target for and control the production of a shift of gaze. Being a key node in the network that subserves visual processing and saccade production, the frontal eye field (FEF) has been an effective area in which to monitor these processes. Certain neurons in the FEF signal the location of conspicuous or meaningful stimuli that may be the targets for saccades. Other neurons control whether and when the gaze shifts. The existence of distinct neural processes for visual selection and saccade production is necessary to explain the flexibility of visually guided behaviour.

NEURAL SELECTION AND CONTROL OF VISUALLY GUIDED EYE MOVEMENTS

1999 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 241-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey D. Schall ◽  
Kirk G. Thompson
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Visually Guided ◽  
Neural Selection ◽  
And Control

Frontal eye field activity preceding aurally guided saccades

1994 ◽  
Vol 71 (3) ◽  
pp. 1250-1253 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. S. Russo ◽  
C. J. Bruce
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Location ◽  
Auditory Target ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Visually Guided ◽  
Movement Vector ◽  
Initial Fixation ◽  
Field Activity ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Movement Field ◽  
Visual Targets

1. We studied neuronal activity in the monkey's frontal eye field (FEF) in conjunction with saccades directed to auditory targets. 2. All FEF neurons with movement activity preceding saccades to visual targets also were active preceding saccades to auditory targets, even when such saccades were made in the dark. Movement cells generally had comparable bursts for aurally and visually guided saccades; visuomovement cells often had weaker bursts in conjunction with aurally guided saccades. 3. When these cells were tested from different initial fixation directions, movement fields associated with aurally guided saccades, like fields mapped with visual targets, were a function of saccade dimensions, and not the speaker's spatial location. Thus, even though sound location cues are chiefly craniotopic, the crucial factor for a FEF discharge before aurally guided saccades was the location of auditory target relative to the current direction of gaze. 4. Intracortical microstimulation at the sites of these cells evoked constant-vector saccades, and not goal-directed saccades. The direction and size of electrically elicited saccades generally matched the cell's movement field for aurally guided saccades. 5. Thus FEF activity appears to have a role in aurally guided as well as visually guided saccades. Moreover, visual and auditory target representations, although initially obtained in different coordinate systems, appear to converge to a common movement vector representation at the FEF stage of saccadic processing that is appropriate for transmittal to saccade-related burst neurons in the superior colliculus and pons.

Visually guided saccade versus eye-hand reach: contrasting neuronal activity in the cortical supplementary and frontal eye fields

1996 ◽  
Vol 75 (5) ◽  
pp. 2187-2191 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Mushiake ◽  
N. Fujii ◽  
J. Tanji
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movement ◽  
Neuronal Activity ◽  
Motor Task ◽  
Oculomotor Control ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Frontal Eye Fields ◽  
Saccadic Eye Movement ◽  
Visually Guided ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field

1. We studied neuronal activity in the supplementary eye field (SEF) and frontal eye field (FEF) of a monkey during performance of a conditional motor task that required capturing of a target either with a saccadic eye movement (the saccade-only condition) or with an eye-hand reach (the saccade-and-reach condition), according to visual instructions. 2. Among 106 SEF neurons that showed presaccadic activity, more than one-half of them (54%) were active preferentially under the saccade-only condition (n = 12) or under the saccade-and-reach condition (n = 45), while the remaining 49 neurons were equally active in both conditions. 3. By contrast, most (97%) of the 109 neurons in the FEF exhibited approximately equal activity in relation to saccades under the two conditions. 4. The present results suggest the possibility that SEF neurons, at least in part, are involved in signaling whether the motor task is oculomotor or combined eye-arm movements, whereas FEF neurons are mostly related to oculomotor control.

Predictive human pursuit and "orbital goal" of microstimulated smooth eye movements

1995 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 1358-1361 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. van Gelder ◽  
S. Lebedev ◽  
W. H. Tsui
Keyword(s):  
Smooth Pursuit ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Initial Position ◽  
Common Point ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Moving Target ◽  
The Gaze ◽  
Target Trajectory ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Normal Human

1. Anticipatory saccades in smooth pursuit move the point of gaze from near the moving target to well ahead of it, interrupting accurate smooth pursuit. Their effects on the pursuit process were studied in 22 normal human subjects. We presented horizontal periodic target trajectories of 30 degrees amplitude and 30 degrees/s constant velocity or 0.4 Hz sinusoidal velocity in 40-s trials. Saccades and surrounding smooth eye movement (SEM) segments were marked and classified by computer. 2. Anticipatory saccades were often followed by slowed SEM that tended to intercept the target at the endpoint of its trajectory. This was seen in the distribution of projections of the initial 60 ms of postsaccadic SEM to the time of the trajectory endpoint. Magnitude of this SEM tended to follow a function of the time and location of the endpoint of the anticipatory saccade, decreasing as the anticipatory saccades landed closer to the trajectory endpoint. 3. The time and location of the target trajectory endpoint seemed to be the goal for this SEM. We believe this to demonstrate the predictive use of the period and amplitude of the trajectory in smooth pursuit, apart from the instantaneous velocity match of the target. 4. Gottlieb and coworkers in the frontal eye field and Ron and Robinson in the cerebellum produced SEMs in the monkey by microstimulation. At some sites in both structures, direction and velocity of the SEMs depended on the initial position of the eye in that the elicited SEMs appeared to be converging toward a common point, or "orbital goal", and the SEM velocity diminished as the gaze neared that goal.2+ Both our SEM after anticipatory saccades and microstimulated SEM in the monkey slowed as the initial position was brought closer to the inferred orbital goal. This similarity suggests that the goal-directed SEM sites in the monkey might be part of a mechanism for predictive pursuit.

scholarly journals Role of Supplementary Eye Field in Saccade Initiation: Executive, Not Direct, Control

2010 ◽  
Vol 103 (2) ◽  
pp. 801-816 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veit Stuphorn ◽  
Joshua W. Brown ◽  
Jeffrey D. Schall
Keyword(s):  
Discharge Rate ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Signal Trial ◽  
Visually Guided ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Task Requirements ◽  
Gaze Holding ◽  
Eye Field

The goal of this study was to determine whether the activity of neurons in the supplementary eye field (SEF) is sufficient to control saccade initiation in macaque monkeys performing a saccade countermanding (stop signal) task. As previously observed, many neurons in the SEF increase the discharge rate before saccade initiation. However, when saccades are canceled in response to a stop signal, effectively no neurons with presaccadic activity display discharge rate modulation early enough to contribute to saccade cancellation. Moreover, SEF neurons do not exhibit a specific threshold discharge rate that could trigger saccade initiation. Yet, we observed more subtle relations between SEF activation and saccade production. The activity of numerous SEF neurons was correlated with response time and varied with sequential adjustments in response latency. Trials in which monkeys canceled or produced a saccade in a stop signal trial were distinguished by a modest difference in discharge rate of these SEF neurons before stop signal or target presentation. These findings indicate that neurons in the SEF, in contrast to counterparts in the frontal eye field and superior colliculus, do not contribute directly and immediately to the initiation of visually guided saccades. However the SEF may proactively regulate saccade production by biasing the balance between gaze-holding and gaze-shifting based on prior performance and anticipated task requirements.

scholarly journals Neural Correlates of Correct and Errant Attentional Selection Revealed Through N2pc and Frontal Eye Field Activity

2010 ◽  
Vol 104 (5) ◽  
pp. 2433-2441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard P. Heitz ◽  
Jeremiah Y. Cohen ◽  
Geoffrey F. Woodman ◽  
Jeffrey D. Schall
Keyword(s):  
Visual Search ◽  
Visual Processing ◽  
Neural Correlates ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Covert Attention ◽  
Extrastriate Cortex ◽  
False Alarms ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Physiological Basis ◽  
Eye Field

The goal of this study was to obtain a better understanding of the physiological basis of errors of visual search. Previous research has shown that search errors occur when visual neurons in the frontal eye field (FEF) treat distractors as if they were targets. We replicated this finding during an inefficient form search and extended it by measuring simultaneously a macaque homologue of an event-related potential indexing the allocation of covert attention known as the m-N2pc. Based on recent work, we expected errors of selection in FEF to propagate to areas of extrastriate cortex responsible for allocating attention and implicated in the generation of the m-N2pc. Consistent with this prediction, we discovered that when FEF neurons selected a distractor instead of the search target, the m-N2pc shifted in the same, incorrect direction prior to the erroneous saccade. This suggests that such errors are due to a systematic misorienting of attention from the initial stages of visual processing. Our analyses also revealed distinct neural correlates of false alarms and guesses. These results demonstrate that errant gaze shifts during visual search arise from errant attentional processing.

Suppression of Task-Related Saccades by Electrical Stimulation in the Primate's Frontal Eye Field

1997 ◽  
Vol 77 (5) ◽  
pp. 2252-2267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas D. Burman ◽  
Charles J. Bruce
Keyword(s):  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Eye Movements ◽  
Frontal Lobe ◽  
Premotor Cortex ◽  
Saccadic Eye Movements ◽  
Association Cortex ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Visually Guided ◽  
Low Intensity ◽  
Eye Field

Burman, Douglas D. and Charles J. Bruce. Suppression of task-related saccades by electrical stimulation in the primate's frontal eye field. J. Neurophysiol. 77: 2252–2267, 1997. Patients with frontal lobe damage have difficulty suppressing reflexive saccades to salient visual stimuli, indicating that frontal lobe neocortex helps to suppress saccades as well as to produce them. In the present study, a role for the frontal eye field (FEF) in suppressing saccades was demonstrated in macaque monkeys by application of intracortical microstimulation during the performance of a visually guided saccade task, a memory prosaccade task, and a memory antisaccade task. A train of low-intensity (20–50 μA) electrical pulses was applied simultaneously with the disappearance of a central fixation target, which was always the cue to initiate a saccade. Trials with and without stimulation were compared, and significantly longer saccade latencies on stimulation trials were considered evidence of suppression. Low-intensity stimulation suppressed task-related saccades at 30 of 77 sites tested. In many cases saccades were suppressed throughout the microstimulation period (usually 450 ms) and then executed shortly after the train ended. Memory-guided saccades were most dramatically suppressed and were often rendered hypometric, whereas visually guided saccades were less severely suppressed by stimulation. At 18 FEF sites, the suppression of saccades was the only observable effect of electrical stimulation. Contraversive saccades were usually more strongly suppressed than ipsiversive ones, and cells recorded at such purely suppressive sites commonly had either foveal receptive fields or postsaccadic responses. At 12 other FEF sites at which saccadic eye movements were elicited at low thresholds, task-related saccades whose vectors differed from that of the electrically elicited saccade were suppressed by electrical stimulation. Such suppression at saccade sites was observed even with currents below the threshold for eliciting saccades. Pure suppression sites tended to be located near or in the fundus, deeper in the anterior bank of the arcuate than elicited saccade sites. Stimulation in the prefrontal association cortex anterior to FEF did not suppress saccades, nor did stimulation in premotor cortex posterior to FEF. These findings indicate that the primate FEF can help orchestrate saccadic eye movements by suppressing inappropriate saccade vectors as well as by selecting, specifying, and triggering appropriate saccades. We hypothesize that saccades could be suppressed both through local FEF interactions and through FEF projections to subcortical regions involved in maintaining fixation.

Suppression of Visually and Memory-Guided Saccades Induced by Electrical Stimulation of the Monkey Frontal Eye Field. II. Suppression of Bilateral Saccades

2004 ◽  
Vol 92 (4) ◽  
pp. 2261-2273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshiko Izawa ◽  
Hisao Suzuki ◽  
Yoshikazu Shinoda
Keyword(s):  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Superior Colliculus ◽  
Reticular Formation ◽  
Neural Mechanism ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Pontine Reticular Formation ◽  
Visually Guided ◽  
Saccade Onset ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Stimulation Of

To understand the neural mechanism of fixation, we investigated effects of electrical stimulation of the frontal eye field (FEF) and its vicinity on visually guided (Vsacs) and memory-guided saccades (Msacs) in trained monkeys and found that there were two types of suppression induced by the electrical stimulation: suppression of ipsilateral saccades and suppression of bilateral saccades. In this report, we characterized the properties of the suppression of bilateral Vsacs and Msacs. Stimulation of the bilateral suppression sites suppressed the initiation of both Vsacs and Msacs in all directions during and ∼50 ms after stimulation but did not affect the vector of these saccades. The suppression was stronger for ipsiversive larger saccades and contraversive smaller saccades, and saccades with initial eye positions shifted more in the saccadic direction. The most effective stimulation timing for the suppression of ipsilateral and contralateral Vsacs was ∼40–50 ms before saccade onset, indicating that the suppression occurred most likely in the superior colliculus and/or the paramedian pontine reticular formation. Suppression sites of bilateral saccades were located in the prearcuate gyrus facing the inferior arcuate sulcus where stimulation induced suppression at ≤40 μA but usually did not evoke any saccades at 80 μA and were different from those of ipsilateral saccades where stimulation evoked saccades at ≤50 μA. The bilateral suppression sites contained fixation neurons. The results suggest that fixation neurons in the bilateral suppression area of the FEF may play roles in maintaining fixation by suppressing saccades in all directions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document