Ocular Responses to Linear Motion Are Inversely Proportional to Viewing Distance

Schwarz, Urs; Busettini, C.; Miles, F. A.

doi:10.1126/science.2506641

Cited by 286 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is in contrast with the characteristics of the linear VOR response in foveate species, in which the amplitude of the eye movement is modulated by the object's distance (Schwarz et al, 1989;Paige et al, 1998).…”

Section: Characteristics Of Cyclovergencecontrasting

confidence: 41%

Dynamic Cyclovergence during Vertical Translation in Humans

Olasagasti¹,

Bockisch

Zee

et al. 2011

Journal of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When humans are accelerated along the body vertical, the right and left eyes show oppositely directed torsional modulation (cyclovergence). The origin of this paradoxical response is unknown. We studied cyclovergence during linear sinusoidal vertical motion in healthy humans. A small head-fixed visual target minimized horizontal and vertical motion of the eyes and therefore isolated the torsional component. For stimuli between 1 and 2 Hz (near the natural range of head motion), the phase of cyclovergence with respect to inertial acceleration was 8.7 Ϯ 2.4°(mean Ϯ 95% CI) and the sensitivity (in degrees per second per g) showed a small but statistically significant increase with frequency. These characteristics contrast with those of cycloversion (conjugate torsion) during horizontal (interaural) inertial stimuli at similar frequencies. From these and previous results, we propose that cyclovergence during vertical translation has two sources, one, like cycloversion, from the low-frequency component of linear acceleration, and another, which we term dynamic cyclovergence, with high-pass characteristics. Furthermore, we suggest that this cyclovergence response in humans is a vestige of the response of lateral-eyed animals to vertical linear acceleration of the head.

show abstract

Section: Characteristics Of Cyclovergencecontrasting

confidence: 41%

Dynamic Cyclovergence during Vertical Translation in Humans

Olasagasti¹,

Bockisch

Zee

et al. 2011

Journal of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because the main conclusions of the present study are independent of these projections and because we did not identify our neurons as FTNs, we have not explicitly incorporated the role of the FL/VPF in Figure 10. The model of Figure 10 also does not address other aspects of the TrVOR properties, such as the dependence on viewing distance and gaze direction as well as the role of the bilateral labyrinths and different otolith afferent contributions (Schwarz et al, 1989;Paige and Tomko, 1991a,b;Schwarz and Miles, 1991;Telford et al, 1997;Angelaki et al, 2000b,c;McHenry and Angelaki, 2000;Angelaki and Hess, 2001). A more detailed investigation of these topics requires further studies.…”

Section: Differences In Neuroanatomical Topology and Processing Betwementioning

confidence: 99%

Differential Sensorimotor Processing of Vestibulo-Ocular Signals during Rotation and Translation

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rotational and translational vestibulo-ocular reflexes (RVOR and TrVOR) function to maintain stable binocular fixation during head movements. Despite similar functional roles, differences in behavioral, neuroanatomical, and sensory afferent properties suggest that the sensorimotor processing may be partially distinct for the RVOR and TrVOR. To investigate the currently poorly understood neural correlates for the TrVOR, the activities of eye movement-sensitive neurons in the rostral vestibular nuclei were examined during pure translation and rotation under both stable gaze and suppression conditions. Two main conclusions were made. First, the 0.5 Hz firing rates of cells that carry both sensory head movement and motor-like signals during rotation were more strongly related to the oculomotor output than to the vestibular sensory signal during translation. Second, neurons the firing rates of which increased for ipsilaterally versus contralaterally directed eye movements (eye-ipsi and eye-contra cells, respectively) exhibited distinct dynamic properties during TrVOR suppression. Eye-ipsi neurons demonstrated relatively flat dynamics that was similar to that of the majority of vestibular-only neurons. In contrast, eye-contra cells were characterized by low-pass filter dynamics relative to linear acceleration and lower sensitivities than eye-ipsi cells. In fact, the main secondary eye-contra neuron in the disynaptic RVOR pathways (position-vestibular-pause cell) that exhibits a robust modulation during RVOR suppression did not modulate during TrVOR suppression. To explain these results, a simple model is proposed that is consistent with the known neuroanatomy and postulates differential projections of sensory canal and otolith signals onto eye-contra and eye-ipsi cells, respectively, within a shared premotor circuitry that generates the VORs.

show abstract

“…acceleration is a horizontal induced linear VOR component, identical to the eye movement response to an actual interaural linear acceleration (Niven et al 1966;Paige and Tomko 1991;Schwarz et al 1989;Schwarz and Miles 1991). Since the illusory tilt direction reverses with roll optokinetic stimulation (Fig.…”

Section: Eye Movementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In many situations, the eye movements generated in response to head tilts and translations are appropriately compensatory Merfeld et al 1996;Merfeld and Young 1995;Paige and Tomko 1991;Schwarz et al 1989), implying that the CNS is able to somehow distinguish gravity from linear acceleration. At least three hypotheses have been proposed to explain how the CNS makes use of GIF information from the otolith organs to influence eye movements: 1) peripheral processing (Mayne 1974;Young and Meiry 1967), 2) central frequency segregation (Paige and Tomko 1991), and 3) GIF resolution (Merfeld et al 1993a;Merfeld and Young 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since a nonzero estimate of interaural linear acceleration (â y ) is predicted, an appropriate horizontal compensatory translational vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) response might be elicited (Fig. 2), as in response to a true interaural linear acceleration (Niven et al 1966;Paige and Tomko 1991;Schwarz et al 1989;Schwarz and Miles 1991). We refer to this horizontal VOR component, represented by an eye rotation vector about the z-axis, as an "induced VOR".…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neural Processing of Gravito-Inertial Cues in Humans. IV. Influence of Visual Rotational Cues During Roll Optokinetic Stimuli

Zupan

Merfeld

2003

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensory systems often provide ambiguous information. For example, otolith organs measure gravito-inertial force (GIF), the sum of gravitational force and inertial force due to linear acceleration. However, according to Einstein's equivalence principle, a change in gravitational force due to tilt is indistinguishable from a change in inertial force due to translation. Therefore the central nervous system (CNS) must use other sensory cues to distinguish tilt from translation. For example, the CNS might use dynamic visual cues indicating rotation to help determine the orientation of gravity (tilt). This, in turn, might influence the neural processes that estimate linear acceleration, since the CNS might estimate gravity and linear acceleration such that the difference between these estimates matches the measured GIF. Depending on specific sensory information inflow, inaccurate estimates of gravity and linear acceleration can occur. Specifically, we predict that illusory tilt caused by roll optokinetic cues should lead to a horizontal vestibuloocular reflex compensatory for an interaural estimate of linear acceleration, even in the absence of actual linear acceleration. To investigate these predictions, we measured eye movements binocularly using infrared video methods in 17 subjects during and after optokinetic stimulation about the subject's nasooccipital (roll) axis (60°/s, clockwise or counterclockwise). The optokinetic stimulation was applied for 60 s followed by 30 s in darkness. We simultaneously measured subjective roll tilt using a somatosensory bar. Each subject was tested in three different orientations: upright, pitched forward 10°, and pitched backward 10°. Five subjects reported significant subjective roll tilt (>10°) in directions consistent with the direction of the optokinetic stimulation. In addition to torsional optokinetic nystagmus and afternystagmus, we measured a horizontal nystagmus to the right during and following clockwise (CW) stimulation and to the left during and following counterclockwise (CCW) stimulation. These measurements match predictions that subjective tilt in the absence of real tilt should induce a nonzero estimate of interaural linear acceleration and, therefore, a horizontal eye response. Furthermore, as predicted, the horizontal response in the dark was larger for Tilters ( n = 5) than for Non-Tilters ( n= 12).

show abstract

Ocular Responses to Linear Motion Are Inversely Proportional to Viewing Distance

Cited by 286 publications

References 12 publications

Dynamic Cyclovergence during Vertical Translation in Humans

Dynamic Cyclovergence during Vertical Translation in Humans

Differential Sensorimotor Processing of Vestibulo-Ocular Signals during Rotation and Translation

Neural Processing of Gravito-Inertial Cues in Humans. IV. Influence of Visual Rotational Cues During Roll Optokinetic Stimuli

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About