Macaque Supplementary Eye Field Neurons Encode Object-Centered Locations Relative to Both Continuous and Discontinuous Objects

2000 ◽  
Vol 83 (4) ◽  
pp. 2392-2411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl R. Olson ◽  
Léon Tremblay
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Macaque Monkey ◽  
Direction Selectivity ◽  
Reference Image ◽  
Minor Effect ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Level Of Activity ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
The Right ◽  
Horizontal Array

Many neurons in the supplementary eye field (SEF) of the macaque monkey fire at different rates before eye movements to the right or the left end of a horizontal bar regardless of the bar's location in the visual field. We refer to such neurons as carrying object-centered directional signals. The aim of the present study was to throw light on the nature of object-centered direction selectivity by determining whether it depends on the reference image's physical continuity. To address this issue, we recorded from 143 neurons in two monkeys. All of these neurons were located in a region coincident with the SEF as mapped out in previous electrical stimulation studies and many exhibited task-related activity in a standard saccade task. In each neuron, we compared neuronal activity across trials in which the monkey made eye movements to the right or left end of a reference image. On interleaved trials, the reference image might be either a horizontal bar or a pair of discrete dots in a horizontal array. The dominant effect revealed by this experiment was that neurons selectively active before eye movements to the right (or left) end of a bar were also selectively active before eye movements to the right (or left) dot in a horizontal array. An additional minor effect, present in around a quarter of the sample, took the form of a difference in firing rate between bar and dot trials, with the greater level of activity most commonly associated with dot trials. These phenomena could not be accounted for by minor intertrial differences in the physical directions of eye movements. In summary, SEF neurons carry object-centered signals and carry these signals regardless of whether the reference image is physically continuous or disjunct.

Macaque SEF Neurons Encode Object-Centered Directions of Eye Movements Regardless of the Visual Attributes of Instructional Cues

1999 ◽  
Vol 81 (5) ◽  
pp. 2340-2346 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl R. Olson ◽  
Sonya N. Gettner
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Macaque Monkey ◽  
Direction Selectivity ◽  
Visual Attributes ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
The Right

Macaque SEF neurons encode object-centered directions of eye movements regardless of the visual attributes of instructional cues. Neurons in the supplementary eye field (SEF) of the macaque monkey exhibit object-centered direction selectivity in the context of a task in which a spot flashed on the right or left end of a sample bar instructs a monkey to make an eye movement to the right or left end of a target bar. To determine whether SEF neurons are selective for the location of the cue, as defined relative to the sample bar, or, alternatively, for the location of the target, as defined relative to the target bar, we carried out recording while monkeys performed a new task. In this task, the color of a cue-spot instructed the monkey to which end of the target bar an eye movement should be made (blue for the left end and yellow for the right end). Object-centered direction selectivity persisted under this condition, indicating that neurons are selective for the location of the target relative to the target bar. However, object-centered signals developed at a longer latency (by ∼200 ms) when the instruction was conveyed by color than when it was conveyed by the location of a spot on a sample bar.

scholarly journals Combination of Neuronal Signals Representing Object-Centered Location and Saccade Direction in Macaque Supplementary Eye Field

2007 ◽  
Vol 97 (5) ◽  
pp. 3554-3566 ◽  
Author(s):  
David E. Moorman ◽  
Carl R. Olson
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Direction Selectivity ◽  
Transitional Stage ◽  
Spatial Selectivity ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Saccade Direction

Neurons in the macaque supplementary eye field (SEF) fire at different rates in conjunction with planning saccades in different directions. They also exhibit object-centered spatial selectivity, firing at different rates when the target of the saccade is at the left or right end of a horizontal bar. To compare the rate of incidence of the two kinds of signal, and to determine how they combine, we recorded from SEF neurons while monkeys performed a task in which the target (a dot or the left or right end of a horizontal bar) could appear in any visual field quadrant. During the period when the target was visible on the screen and the monkey was preparing to make a saccade, many neurons exhibited selectivity for saccade direction, firing at a rate determined by the direction of the impending saccade irrespective of whether the target was a dot or the end of a bar. On bar trials, many of the same neurons exhibited object-centered selectivity, firing more strongly when the target was at the preferred end of the bar regardless of saccade direction. The rate of incidence of object-centered selectivity (33%) was lower overall than that of saccade-direction selectivity (56%). Signals related to saccade direction and the object-centered location of the target tended to combine additively. The results suggest that the SEF is at a transitional stage between representing the object-centered command and specifying the parameters of the saccade.

Attention-related neurons in the supplementary eye field of the macaque monkey

1997 ◽  
Vol 113 (1) ◽  
pp. 180-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leopoldo Bon ◽  
Cristina Lucchetti
Keyword(s):  
Macaque Monkey ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field

scholarly journals Right frontal eye field has perceptual and oculomotor functions during optokinetic stimulation and nystagmus

2020 ◽  
Vol 123 (2) ◽  
pp. 571-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Mastropasqua ◽  
James Dowsett ◽  
Marianne Dieterich ◽  
Paul C. J. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Visual Motion ◽  
Optokinetic Nystagmus ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Optokinetic Stimulation ◽  
Motion Discrimination ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
The Right

The right frontal eye field (rFEF) is associated with visual perception and eye movements. rFEF is activated during optokinetic nystagmus (OKN), a reflex that moves the eye in response to visual motion (optokinetic stimulation, OKS). It remains unclear whether rFEF plays causal perceptual and/or oculomotor roles during OKS and OKN. To test this, participants viewed a leftward-moving visual scene of vertical bars and judged whether a flashed dot was moving. Single pulses of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) were applied to rFEF on half of trials. In half of blocks, to explore oculomotor control, participants performed an OKN in response to the OKS. rFEF TMS, during OKN, made participants more accurate on trials when the dot was still, and it slowed eye movements. In separate blocks, participants fixated during OKS. This not only controlled for eye movements but also allowed the use of EEG to explore the FEF’s role in visual motion discrimination. In these blocks, by contrast, leftward dot motion discrimination was impaired, associated with a disruption of the frontal-posterior balance in alpha-band oscillations. None of these effects occurred in a control site (M1) experiment. These results demonstrate multiple related yet dissociable causal roles of the right FEF during optokinetic stimulation. NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study demonstrates causal roles of the right frontal eye field (FEF) in motion discrimination and eye movement control during visual scene motion: previous work had only examined other stimuli and eye movements such as saccades. Using combined transcranial magnetic stimulation and EEG and a novel optokinetic stimulation motion-discrimination task, we find evidence for multiple related yet dissociable causal roles within the FEF: perceptual processing during optokinetic stimulation, generation of the optokinetic nystagmus, and the maintenance of alpha oscillations.

The effects of combined superior temporal polysensory area and frontal eye field lesions on eye movements in the macaque monkey

1997 ◽  
Vol 84 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 31-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Séamas P. ÓScalaidhe ◽  
Hillary R. Rodman ◽  
Thomas D. Albright ◽  
Charles G. Gross
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Macaque Monkey ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field

scholarly journals Role of the human supplementary eye field in the control of saccadic eye movements

2007 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 997-1008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Parton ◽  
Parashkev Nachev ◽  
Timothy L. Hodgson ◽  
Dominic Mort ◽  
David Thomas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Saccadic Eye Movements ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of the Human Frontal Eye Field: Effects on Visual Perception and Attention

2002 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 1109-1120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-Hélène Grosbras ◽  
Tomáš Paus
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Visual Detection ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Target Onset ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
The Right

When looking at one object, human subjects can shift their attention to another object in their visual field without moving the eyes. Such shifts of attention activate the same brain regions as those involved in the execution of eye movements. Here we investigate the role of one of the main cortical oculomotor area, namely, the frontal eye field (FEF), in shifts of attention. We used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), a technique known to disrupt transiently eye-movements preparation. We hypothesized that if the FEF is a necessary element in the network involved in shifting attention without moving the eyes, then TMS should also disrupt visuospatial attention. For each volunteer, we positioned the TMS coil over the probabilistic anatomical location of the FEF, and we verified that single pulses delayed eye movements. We then applied TMS during a visuospatial attention task. In this task, a central arrow directed shifts of attention and the subject responded by a keypress to a subsequent visual peripheral target without moving the eyes from the central fixation point. In a few trials, the cue was invalid or uninformative, yielding slower responses than when the cue was valid. We delivered single pulses either 53 msec before or 70 msec after target onset. Contrary to our prediction, the main effect of the stimulation was a decrease in reaction time when it was applied 53 msec before target onset. TMS over the left hemisphere facilitated responses to targets in the right hemifield only and for all cueing conditions, whereas TMS over the right hemisphere had a bilateral effect for valid and neutral but not invalid cueing. Thus, TMS interfered with shift of attention only in the case of right hemisphere stimulation: it increased the cost of invalid cueing. Our results suggest that TMS over the FEF facilitates visual detection, and thereby reduces reaction time. This finding provides new insights into the role of the human FEF in processing visual information. The functional asymmetry observed for both facilitation of visual detection and interference with shifts of attention provides further evidence for the dominance of the right hemisphere for those processes. Our results also underline that the disruptive or facilitative effect of TMS over a given region depends upon the behavioral context.

Functional Anatomy of Pursuit Eye Movements in Humans as Revealed by fMRI

1999 ◽  
Vol 82 (1) ◽  
pp. 463-471 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurent Petit ◽  
James V. Haxby
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Temporal Cortex ◽  
Functional Anatomy ◽  
Saccadic Eye Movements ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Pursuit Eye Movements ◽  
Magnetic Imaging ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Parietal Eye

We have investigated the functional anatomy of pursuit eye movements in humans with functional magnetic imaging. The performance of pursuit eye movements induced activations in the cortical eye fields also activated during the execution of visually guided saccadic eye movements, namely in the precentral cortex [frontal eye field (FEF)], the medial superior frontal cortex (supplementary eye field), the intraparietal cortex (parietal eye field), and the precuneus, and at the junction of occipital and temporal cortex (MT/MST) cortex. Pursuit-related areas could be distinguished from saccade-related areas both in terms of spatial extent and location. Pursuit-related areas were smaller than their saccade-related counterparts, three of eight significantly so. The pursuit-related FEF was usually inferior to saccade-related FEF. Other pursuit-related areas were consistently posterior to their saccade-related counterparts. The current findings provide the first functional imaging evidence for a distinction between two parallel cortical systems that subserve pursuit and saccadic eye movements in humans.

Effect of eye position within the orbit on electrically elicited saccadic eye movements: a comparison of the macaque monkey's frontal and supplementary eye fields

1993 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 800-818 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. S. Russo ◽  
C. J. Bruce
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Saccadic Eye Movements ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Eye Position ◽  
Constant Vector ◽  
Rectangular Array ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Orbital Perturbation ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
The Mean

1. We quantitatively compared the effects of eye position within the orbit on saccadic eye movements electrically elicited from two oculomotor areas of the macaque monkey's frontal lobe cortex: the frontal eye field (FEF) and the supplementary eye field (SEF). 2. The effect of eye position on electrically elicited saccades was studied by delivering 70-ms trains of intracortical microstimulation while the monkeys fixated a spot of light. Tests of different fixation points located across a rectangular array were randomly intermixed. Complete experiments were carried out on 38 sites in three FEFs of two monkeys and 59 sites from three SEFs of the same two monkeys. Stimulation currents for the array experiments were usually 10–20 microA above the site threshold; the average current used was 36 microA for FEF and 49 microA for SEF. 3. The magnitude of effect of the initial eye position on the elicited saccade's dimensions was quantified at each site by computing the linear regression of saccadic eye movement displacement on the eye position within the orbit when stimulation was applied. This computation was done separately for the horizontal and vertical axes. We call the resulting pair of regression coefficients “orbital perturbation indexes.” Indexes of 0.0 represent elicited saccades that do not change their trajectory with different initial eye positions (constant-vector saccades), whereas indexes of -1.0 represent elicited saccades that end at the same orbital position regardless of initial eye position (goal-directed saccades). 4. The effect of eye position varied across sites. In both FEF and SEF, the orbital perturbation indexes were distributed between approximately 0.0 and -0.5, with the horizontal and vertical indexes highly correlated across sites. 5. The average orbital perturbation indexes were small for both eye fields and were not significantly different. The mean horizontal indexes were -0.13 and -0.16 for SEF and FEF, respectively. The mean vertical indexes were -0.16 and -0.13. Neither SEF versus FEF difference was statistically significant. 6. In both SEF and FEF, sites yielding larger-amplitude saccades generally had larger orbital effects than sites yielding smaller saccades. This relationship accounted for the majority of the variability of the orbital perturbation indexes across sites in both SEF and FEF. 7. These results indicate that SEF and FEF are not distinguished from each other by the orbital dependence of their electrically elicited saccades. Thus they do not confirm the previously hypothesized dichotomy that FEF codes constant-vector saccades and SEF codes goal-directed saccades.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document