scholarly journals Differences in Noradrenaline Receptor Expression Across Different Neuronal Subtypes in Macaque Frontal Eye Field

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max Lee ◽  
Adrienne Mueller ◽  
Tirin Moore
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Long Range ◽  
Pyramidal Neuron ◽  
Pyramidal Neurons ◽  
Inhibitory Interneuron ◽  
Receptor Expression ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Receptor Subtypes ◽  
Visual Spatial ◽  
Eye Field

Cognitive functions such as attention and working memory are modulated by noradrenaline receptors in the prefrontal cortex (PFC). The frontal eye field (FEF) has been shown to play an important role in visual spatial attention. However, little is known about the underlying circuitry. The aim of this study was to characterize the expression of noradrenaline receptors on different pyramidal neuron and inhibitory interneuron subtypes in macaque FEF. Using immunofluorescence, we found broad expression of noradrenaline receptors across all layers of the FEF. Differences in the expression of different noradrenaline receptors were observed across different inhibitory interneuron subtypes. No significant differences were observed in the expression of noradrenaline receptors across different pyramidal neuron subtypes. However, we found that putative long-range projecting pyramidal neurons expressed all noradrenaline receptor subtypes at a much higher proportion than any of the other neuronal subtypes. Nearly all long-range projecting pyramidal neurons expressed all types of noradrenaline receptor, suggesting that there is no receptor-specific machinery acting on these long-range projecting pyramidal neurons. This pattern of expression among long-range projecting pyramidal neurons suggests a mechanism by which noradrenergic modulation of FEF activity influences attention and working memory.

scholarly journals Dopamine Receptor Expression Among Local and Visual Cortex-Projecting Frontal Eye Field Neurons

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 148-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrienne Mueller ◽  
Rebecca M Krock ◽  
Steven Shepard ◽  
Tirin Moore
Keyword(s):  
Visual Cortex ◽  
Pyramidal Neurons ◽  
Receptor Expression ◽  
Inhibitory Neurons ◽  
Extrastriate Cortex ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
D2 Dopamine Receptors ◽  
Dopaminergic Modulation ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Parvalbumin Neurons

Abstract Dopaminergic modulation of prefrontal cortex plays an important role in numerous cognitive processes, including attention. The frontal eye field (FEF) is modulated by dopamine and has an established role in visual attention, yet the underlying circuitry upon which dopamine acts is not known. We compared the expression of D1 and D2 dopamine receptors (D1Rs and D2Rs) across different classes of FEF neurons, including those projecting to dorsal or ventral extrastriate cortex. First, we found that both D1Rs and D2Rs are more prevalent on pyramidal neurons than on several classes of interneurons and are particularly prevalent on putatively long-range projecting pyramidals. Second, higher proportions of pyramidal neurons express D1Rs than D2Rs. Third, overall a higher proportion of inhibitory neurons expresses D2Rs than D1Rs. Fourth, among inhibitory interneurons, a significantly higher proportion of parvalbumin+ neurons expresses D2Rs than D1Rs, and a significantly higher proportion of calbindin+ neurons expresses D1Rs than D2Rs. Finally, compared with D2Rs, virtually all of the neurons with identified projections to both dorsal and ventral extrastriate visual cortex expressed D1Rs. Our results demonstrate that dopamine tends to act directly on the output of the FEF and that dopaminergic modulation of top-down projections to visual cortex is achieved predominately via D1Rs.

Topographic Maps in Human Frontal Cortex Revealed in Memory-Guided Saccade and Spatial Working-Memory Tasks

2007 ◽  
Vol 97 (5) ◽  
pp. 3494-3507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabine Kastner ◽  
Kevin DeSimone ◽  
Christina S. Konen ◽  
Sara M. Szczepanski ◽  
Kevin S. Weiner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Frontal Cortex ◽  
Spatial Working Memory ◽  
Memory Task ◽  
Topographic Maps ◽  
Button Press ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Topographic Organization ◽  
Human Frontal Cortex ◽  
Eye Field

We used fMRI at 3 Tesla and improved spatial resolution (2 × 2 × 2 mm3) to investigate topographic organization in human frontal cortex using memory-guided response tasks performed at 8 or 12 peripheral locations arranged clockwise around a central fixation point. The tasks required the location of a peripheral target to be remembered for several seconds after which the subjects either made a saccade to the remembered location (memory-guided saccade task) or judged whether a test stimulus appeared in the same or a slightly different location by button press (spatial working-memory task). With these tasks, we found two topographic maps in each hemisphere, one in the superior branch of precentral cortex and caudalmost part of the superior frontal sulcus, in the region of the human frontal eye field, and a second in the inferior branch of precentral cortex and caudalmost part of the inferior frontal sulcus, both of which greatly overlapped with activations evoked by visually guided saccades. In each map, activated voxels coded for saccade directions and memorized locations predominantly in the contralateral hemifield with neighboring saccade directions and memorized locations represented in adjacent locations of the map. Particular saccade directions or memorized locations were often represented in multiple locations of the map. The topographic activation patterns showed individual variability from subject to subject but were reproducible within subjects. Notably, only saccade-related activation, but no topographic organization, was found in the region of the human supplementary eye field in dorsomedial prefrontal cortex. Together these results show that topographic organization can be revealed outside sensory cortical areas using more complex behavioral tasks.

Neuronal Mechanisms of Attentional Control

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelsey L. Clark ◽  
Behrad Noudoost ◽  
Robert J. Schafer ◽  
Tirin Moore
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Attention ◽  
Covert Attention ◽  
Extrastriate Cortex ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Neural Signals ◽  
Electrical Microstimulation ◽  
Visual Spatial ◽  
Neuronal Mechanisms ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Visual Cortical

Covert spatial attention prioritizes the processing of stimuli at a given peripheral location, away from the direction of gaze, and selectively enhances visual discrimination, speed of processing, contrast sensitivity, and spatial resolution at the attended location. While correlates of this type of attention, which are believed to underlie perceptual benefits, have been found in a variety of visual cortical areas, more recent observations suggest that these effects may originate from frontal and parietal areas. Evidence for a causal role in attention is especially robust for the Frontal Eye Field, an oculomotor area within the prefrontal cortex. FEF firing rates have been shown to reflect the location of voluntarily deployed covert attention in a variety of tasks, and these changes in firing rate precede those observed in extrastriate cortex. In addition, manipulation of FEF activity—whether via electrical microstimulation, pharmacologically, or operant conditioning—can produce attention-like effects on behaviour and can modulate neural signals within posterior visual areas. We review this evidence and discuss the role of the FEF in visual spatial attention.

scholarly journals Intracellular Properties of Deep-Layer Pyramidal Neurons in Frontal Eye Field of Macaque Monkeys

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Piette ◽  
Marie Vandecasteele ◽  
Clémentine Bosch-Bouju ◽  
Valérie Goubard ◽  
Vincent Paillé ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pyramidal Neurons ◽  
Deep Layer ◽  
Brain Slices ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Visual Responses ◽  
Biophysical Properties ◽  
Eye Field

Although many details remain unknown, several positive statements can be made about the laminar distribution of primate frontal eye field (FEF) neurons with different physiological properties. Most certainly, pyramidal neurons in the deep layer of FEF that project to the brainstem carry movement and fixation signals but clear evidence also support that at least some deep-layer pyramidal neurons projecting to the superior colliculus carry visual responses. Thus, deep-layer neurons in FEF are functionally heterogeneous. Despite the useful functional distinctions between neuronal responses in vivo, the underlying existence of distinct cell types remain uncertain, mostly due to methodological limitations of extracellular recordings in awake behaving primates. To substantiate the functionally defined cell types encountered in the deep layer of FEF, we measured the biophysical properties of pyramidal neurons recorded intracellularly in brain slices issued from macaque monkey biopsies. Here, we found that biophysical properties recorded in vitro permit us to distinguish two main subtypes of regular-spiking neurons, with, respectively, low-resistance and low excitability vs. high-resistance and strong excitability. These results provide useful constraints for cognitive models of visual attention and saccade production by indicating that at least two distinct populations of deep-layer neurons exist.

scholarly journals Propofol Anesthesia Increases Long-range Frontoparietal Corticocortical Interaction in the Oculomotor Circuit in Macaque Monkeys

2019 ◽  
Vol 130 (4) ◽  
pp. 560-571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Ma ◽  
Wentai Liu ◽  
Andrew E. Hudson
Keyword(s):  
Functional Connectivity ◽  
Long Range ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Fold Increase ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Lateral Intraparietal Area ◽  
Cortical Areas ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Phase Amplitude ◽  
Frequency Phase

Abstract Editor’s Perspective What We Already Know about This Topic What This Article Tells Us That Is New Background Frontoparietal functional connectivity decreases with multiple anesthetics using electrophysiology and functional imaging. This decrease has been proposed as a final common functional pathway to produce anesthesia. Two alternative measures of long-range cortical interaction are coherence and phase-amplitude coupling. Although phase-amplitude coupling within frontal cortex changes with propofol administration, the effects of propofol on phase-amplitude coupling between different cortical areas have not previously been reported. Based on phase-amplitude coupling observed within frontal lobe during the anesthetized period, it was hypothesized that between-lead phase-amplitude coupling analysis should decrease between frontal and parietal leads during propofol anesthesia. Methods A published monkey electrocorticography data set (N = 2 animals) was used to test for interactions in the cortical oculomotor circuit, which is robustly interconnected in primates, and in the visual system during propofol anesthesia using coherence and interarea phase-amplitude coupling. Results Propofol induces coherent slow oscillations in visual and oculomotor networks made up of cortical areas with strong anatomic projections. Frontal eye field within-area phase-amplitude coupling increases with a time course consistent with a bolus response to intravenous propofol (modulation index increase of 12.6-fold). Contrary to the hypothesis, interareal phase-amplitude coupling also increases with propofol, with the largest increase in phase-amplitude coupling in frontal eye field low-frequency phase modulating lateral intraparietal area β-power (27-fold increase) and visual area 2 low-frequency phase altering visual area 1 β-power (19-fold increase). Conclusions Propofol anesthesia induces coherent oscillations and increases certain frontoparietal interactions in oculomotor cortices. Frontal eye field and lateral intraparietal area show increased coherence and phase-amplitude coupling. Visual areas 2 and 1, which have similar anatomic projection patterns, show similar increases in phase-amplitude coupling, suggesting higher order feedback increases in influence during propofol anesthesia relative to wakefulness. This suggests that functional connectivity between frontal and parietal areas is not uniformly decreased by anesthetics.

Working, Declarative, and Procedural Memory in Children With Developmental Language Disorder

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (12) ◽  
pp. 4162-4178
Author(s):  
Emily Jackson ◽  
Suze Leitão ◽  
Mary Claessen ◽  
Mark Boyes
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Declarative Memory ◽  
Memory Systems ◽  
Procedural Memory ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Visual Spatial

Purpose Previous research into the working, declarative, and procedural memory systems in children with developmental language disorder (DLD) has yielded inconsistent results. The purpose of this research was to profile these memory systems in children with DLD and their typically developing peers. Method One hundred four 5- to 8-year-old children participated in the study. Fifty had DLD, and 54 were typically developing. Aspects of the working memory system (verbal short-term memory, verbal working memory, and visual–spatial short-term memory) were assessed using a nonword repetition test and subtests from the Working Memory Test Battery for Children. Verbal and visual–spatial declarative memory were measured using the Children's Memory Scale, and an audiovisual serial reaction time task was used to evaluate procedural memory. Results The children with DLD demonstrated significant impairments in verbal short-term and working memory, visual–spatial short-term memory, verbal declarative memory, and procedural memory. However, verbal declarative memory and procedural memory were no longer impaired after controlling for working memory and nonverbal IQ. Declarative memory for visual–spatial information was unimpaired. Conclusions These findings indicate that children with DLD have deficits in the working memory system. While verbal declarative memory and procedural memory also appear to be impaired, these deficits could largely be accounted for by working memory skills. The results have implications for our understanding of the cognitive processes underlying language impairment in the DLD population; however, further investigation of the relationships between the memory systems is required using tasks that measure learning over long-term intervals. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13250180

Visuomotor Transformations Are Modulated by Focused Ultrasound over Frontal Eye Field

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaleb A. Lowe ◽  
Wolf Zinke ◽  
M. Anthony Phipps ◽  
Josh Cosman ◽  
Micala Maddox ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Focused Ultrasound ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Visuomotor Transformations ◽  
Eye Field

The Prediction of Problem-Solving Assessed Via Microworlds

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Greiff ◽  
Katarina Krkovic ◽  
Jarkko Hautamäki
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Complex Problem ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Assessment Instruments ◽  
Complex Problem Solving ◽  
Visual Spatial ◽  
Rule Knowledge ◽  
Rule Application ◽  
Fluid Reasoning

Abstract. In this study, we explored the network of relations between fluid reasoning, working memory, and the two dimensions of complex problem solving, rule knowledge and rule application. In doing so, we replicated the recent study by Bühner, Kröner, and Ziegler (2008) and the structural relations investigated therein [ Bühner, Kröner, & Ziegler, (2008) . Working memory, visual-spatial intelligence and their relationship to problem-solving. Intelligence, 36, 672–680]. However, in the present study, we used different assessment instruments by employing assessments of figural, numerical, and verbal fluid reasoning, an assessment of numerical working memory, and a complex problem solving assessment using the MicroDYN approach. In a sample of N = 2,029 Finnish sixth-grade students of which 328 students took the numerical working memory assessment, the findings diverged substantially from the results reported by Bühner et al. Importantly, in the present study, fluid reasoning was the main source of variation for rule knowledge and rule application, and working memory contributed only a little added value. Albeit generally in line with previously conducted research on the relation between complex problem solving and other cognitive abilities, these findings directly contrast the results of Bühner et al. (2008) who reported that only working memory was a source of variation in complex problem solving, whereas fluid reasoning was not. Explanations for the different patterns of results are sought, and implications for the use of assessment instruments and for research on interindividual differences in complex problem solving are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document