Short-latency disparity vergence responses and their dependence on a prior saccadic eye movement

1996 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. 1392-1410 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Busettini ◽  
F. A. Miles ◽  
R. J. Krauzlis

1. A dichoptic viewing arrangement was used to study the initial vergence eye movements elicited by brief horizontal disparity steps applied to large textured patterns in three rhesus monkeys. Disconjugate steps (range, 0.2-10.9 degrees) were applied to the patterns at selected times (range, 13-303 ms) after 10 degrees leftward saccades into the center of the pattern. The horizontal and vertical positions of both eyes were recorded with the electromagnetic search coil technique. 2. Without training or reinforcement, disparity steps of suitable amplitude consistently elicited vergence responses at short latencies. For example, with 1.8 degrees crossed-disparity steps applied 26 ms after the centering saccade, the mean latency of onset of convergence for each of the three monkeys was 52.2 +/- 3.8 (SD) ms, 52.3 +/- 5.2 ms, and 53.4 +/- 4.1 ms. 3. Experiments in which the disparity step was confined to only one eye indicated that each eye was not simply tracking the apparent motion that is saw. For example, when crossed-disparity steps were confined to the right eye (which saw leftward steps), the result was (binocular) convergence in which the left eye moved to the right even though that eye had seen only a stationary scene. This movement of the left eye cannot have resulted from independent monocular tracking and indicates that the vergences here derived from the binocular misalignment of the two retinal images. 4. The initial vergence responses to crossed-disparity steps had the following main features. 1) They were always in the correct (i.e., convergent) direction over the full range of stimuli tested, the initial vergence acceleration increasing progressively with increases in disparity until reaching a peak with steps of 1.4-2.4 degrees and declining thereafter to a nonzero asymptote as steps exceeded 5-7 degrees. 2) They showed transient postsaccadic enhancement whereby steps applied in the immediate wake of a saccadic eye movement resulted in much higher initial vergence accelerations than the same steps applied some time later. The response decline in the wake of a saccade was roughly exponential with time constants of 67 +/- 5 (SD) ms, 35 +/- 2 ms, and 54 +/- 4 ms for the three animals. 3) That the postsaccadic enhancement might have resulted in part from the visual stimulation associated with the prior saccade was suggested by the finding that enhancement could also be observed when the disparity steps were applied in the wake of (conjugate) saccadelike shifts of the textured pattern. However, this visual enhancement did not reach a peak unit 17-37 ms after the end of the "simulated" saccade, and the peak enhancement averaged only 45% of that after a "real" saccade. 4) Qualitatively similar transient enhancements in the wake of real and simulated saccades have also been reported for initial ocular following responses elicited by conjugate drifts of the visual scene. We replicated the enhancement effects on ocular following to allow a direct comparison with the enhancement effects on disparity vergence using the same animals and visual stimulus patterns and, despite some clear quantitative differences, we suggest that the enhancement effects share a similar etiology. 5. Initial vergence responses to uncrossed-disparity steps had the following main features. 1) They were in the correct (i.e., divergent) direction only for very small steps (< 1.5-2.5 degrees), and then only when postsaccadic delays were small; when the magnitude of the steps was increased beyond these levels, responses declined to zero and thereafter reversed direction, eventually reaching a nonzero (convergent) asymptote similar to that seen with large crossed-disparity steps; convergent responses were also seen with larger vertical disparity steps, suggesting that they represent default responses to any disparity exceeding a few degrees. 2) As the postsaccadic delay was increased, responses to small steps (1.8 degrees) declined to zero and thereafter re

1976 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 852-870 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. L. Robinson ◽  
R. H. Wurtz

1. In order to see whether cells in the superficial layers of the monkey superior colliculus can differentiate between real stimulus movement and self-induced stimulus movement we compared the discharge of these cells to stimulus movement in front of the stationary eye with stimulus movement generated by eye movements across a stationary stimulus. 2. Most of the cells recorded (65% of 231 cells) responded to stimulus velocities in front of the stationary eye as fast as those occurring during the peak velocity of a saccadic eye movement. Those cells that do respond usually have weak inhibitory regions and tend to have receptive fields further from fovea. 3. Move (61% of 105 cells) of the cells that did respond to rapid stimulus movement did not respond when an eye movement swept the receptive field over a stationary stimulus. 4. About half of these cells differentiated between these stimulus conditions when we used stimuli at least 1 log unit above background illumination; the remaining cells differentiated for stimuli 2 and 3 log units above background. Many cells differentiated between the two stimulus conditions over a wide range of directions of movement and the effect appears with about equal frequency in receptive fields at all distances from the fovea. 5. The differentiation is present for most cells even when the background illumination is reduced, indicating that visual factors are not the cause of the effect on these cells but may modify the response of other cells. 6. The suppression of background activity accompanying eye movements in the light is present following eye movements made in total darkness; the suppression, therefore, must result from an extraretinal signal. 4. The failure of these cells to respond to visual stimulation during eye movements is due to the same extraretinal signal that produces the suppression since a) the cells that show this suppression tend to be those that fail to respond to stimuli during eye movements, b) the time course of the suppression matches the time at which the effects of visual stimulation during an eye movement would reach the colliculus, and c) the cells which differentiate also show a decreased responsiveness to visual stimulation during the time of background suppression. While this extraretinal signal has the characteristics one would expect of a corollary discharge, proprioception as a source of the signal cannot be excluded. 8. Cells which differentiate between the two stimulus conditions usually also show an enhanced response to a visual stimulus in their receptive field when it is to be the target for a saccadic eye movement. These cells in the superior colliculus receive an extraretinal input which permits them to differentiate betweent real stimulus movements and stimulus movements resulting from the monkey's own eye movements. This differentiation would provide an uncontaminated visual movement signal and facilitate the detection of real movement in the environment...


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricky R Savjani ◽  
Elizabeth Halfen ◽  
Jung Hwan Kim ◽  
David Ress

SummaryThe superior colliculus (SC) is a layered midbrain structure involved in directing eye movements and coordinating visual attention. Electrical stimulation and neuronal recordings in the intermediate layers of monkey SC have shown a retinotopic organization for the mediation of saccadic eye-movements. However, in human SC the topography of saccades is unknown. Here, a novel experimental paradigm and highresolution (1.2-mm) functional magnetic resonance imaging methods were used to measure activity evoked by saccadic eye movements within SC. Results provide three critical observations about the topography of the human SC: (1) saccades along the superior-inferior visual axis are mapped across the medial-lateral anatomy of the SC; (2) the saccadic eye-movement representation is in register with the retinotopic organization of visual stimulation; and (3) activity evoked by saccades occurs deeper within SC than that evoked by visual stimulation. These approaches lay the foundation for studying the organization of human subcortical eye-movement mechanisms.HighlightsHigh-resolution functional MRI enabled imaging from intermediate layers of human SCSaccades along superior-inferior visual field are mapped across medial-lateral SCSaccadic eye movement maps lie deeper in SC and are in alignment with retinotopyeTOC BlurbSavjani et al. found the polar angle representation of saccadic eye movements in human SC. The topography is similar in monkey SC, is in register with the retinotopic organization evoked by visual stimulation, but lies within deeper layers. These methods enable investigation of human subcortical eye-movement organization and visual function.


1996 ◽  
Vol 75 (5) ◽  
pp. 2187-2191 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Mushiake ◽  
N. Fujii ◽  
J. Tanji

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.


2001 ◽  
Vol 103 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 167-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annelies Broerse ◽  
Esther A.E Holthausen ◽  
Robert J van den Bosch ◽  
Johan A den Boer

2020 ◽  
Vol 123 (2) ◽  
pp. 451-453
Author(s):  
Joshua A. Seideman

We make a saccadic eye movement once every few hundred milliseconds; however, the neural control of saccade execution is not fully understood. Dynamic, moment-by-moment variations in saccade velocity are typically thought to be controlled by neurons in the lower, but not the upper regions of the brainstem. In a recent report, Smalianchuk et al. (Smalianchuk I, Jagadisan UK, Gandhi NJ. J Neurosci 38: 10156–10167, 2018) provided strong evidence for a role of the superior colliculus, a midbrain structure, in the instantaneous control of saccade velocity, suggesting the revision of long-standing models of oculomotor control.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document