Recruitment of a contralateral head turning synergy by stimulation of monkey supplementary eye fields

Pace, Michael; Cushing, Sharon L.

doi:10.1152/jn.00487.2011

Cited by 16 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Signals recorded in the supplementary eye fields (SEF) arise too late to be directly signal movement cancellation , and evidence favors a role for this area in the adaptive control of behavior rather than strict inhibition (Stuphorn and Schall 2006). Furthermore, SEF stimulation, like stimulation of the FEF and SC, also recruits a contralateral head-turning synergy that scales with gaze shift magnitude and never recruited anything resembling movement cancellation (Chapman et al 2012). Although further work is needed, we suggest that the mechanisms that actively brake on-going head motion reside outside of well-studied oculomotor areas.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of a within-trial measure of the oculomotor stop process

Goonetilleke

Wong

2012

Journal of Neurophysiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The countermanding (or stop signal) task requires subjects try to withhold a planned movement upon the infrequent presentation of a stop signal. We have previously proposed a within-trial measure of movement cancellation based on neck muscle recruitment during the cancellation of eye-head gaze shifts. Here, we examined such activity after either a bright or dim stop signal, a manipulation known to prolong the stop signal reaction time (SSRT). Regardless of stop signal intensity, subjects generated an appreciable number of head-only errors during successfully cancelled gaze shifts (compensatory eye-in-head motion ensured gaze stability), wherein subtle head motion toward a peripheral target was ultimately stopped by a braking pulse of antagonist neck muscle activity. Both the SSRT and timing of antagonist muscle recruitment relative to the stop signal increased for dim stop signals and decreased for longer stop signal delays. Moreover, we observed substantial variation in the distribution of antagonist muscle recruitment latencies across our sample. The magnitude and variance of the SSRTs and antagonist muscle recruitment latencies correlated positively across subjects, as did the within-subject changes across bright and dim stop signals. Finally, we fitted our behavioral data with a race model architecture that incorporated a lower threshold for initiating head movements. This model allowed us to estimate the efferent delay between the completion of a central stop process and the recruitment of antagonist neck muscles; the estimated efferent delay remained consistent within subjects across stop signal intensity. Overall, these results are consistent with the hypothesis that neck muscle recruitment during a specific subset of cancelled trials provides a peripheral expression of oculomotor cancellation on a single trial. In the discussion, we briefly speculate on the potential value of this measure for research in basic or clinical domains and consider current issues that limit more widespread use.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of a within-trial measure of the oculomotor stop process

Goonetilleke

Wong

2012

Journal of Neurophysiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The SEF does contribute crucially to the production of sequences of saccades (Isoda & Tanji 2002, Lu et al 2002, Histed & Miller 2006, Berdyyeva & Olson 2010, Sharika et al 2013. It also coordinates saccades with reaching (Fujii et al 2002) and with head movements (Chen & Walton 2005, Chapman et al 2012). Thus, these medial frontal areas seem to be outside the direct visuomotor pathway.…”

Section: Medial Frontal Cortexmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visuomotor Functions in the Frontal Lobe

Schall

2015

Annu. Rev. Vis. Sci.

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review surveys how vision becomes action through the frontal lobe. Signals from extrastriate areas create maps in frontal areas. These maps are shaped by visual features and shaded by goals, values, and experience, and they guide contingent activation of motor circuits to execute coordinated gaze, head, and limb movements. Frontal circuits also support the visual perception of learned objects, events, and actions. Other frontal circuits monitor consequences and exert executive control to improve the effectiveness of visually guided behavior.

show abstract

“…Recent work shows that ICMS‐SEF also evokes rapid and robust recruitment of a contralateral head‐turning synergy on neck muscles that begins ~30 ms after stimulation onset, preceding saccades by ~40–70 ms (Chapman et al ., ). Stimulation of many oculomotor areas evokes an earlier response on the neck vs. saccades, due to differences in the processing of premotor cephalomotor vs. oculomotor commands (Corneil et al ., ; Elsley et al ., ; Farshadmanesh et al ., ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Stimulation of many oculomotor areas evokes an earlier response on the neck vs. saccades, due to differences in the processing of premotor cephalomotor vs. oculomotor commands (Corneil et al ., ; Elsley et al ., ; Farshadmanesh et al ., ). The response latency following ICMS‐SEF suggests that recruitment arises via feedforward connections from the SEF to the oculomotor brainstem (perhaps via the frontal eye fields, FEFs), and then onto the motor periphery (Chapman et al ., ). If so, larger evoked neck muscle responses should occur when the SEF are more active at the time of stimulation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Short‐duration stimulation of the supplementary eye fields perturbs anti‐saccade performance while potentiating contralateral head orienting

Chapman,

Corneil

2013

Eur J of Neuroscience

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many forms of brain stimulation utilize the notion of state dependency, whereby greater influences are observed when a given area is more engaged at the time of stimulation. Here, by delivering intracortical microstimulation (ICMS) to the supplementary eye fields (SEF) of monkeys performing interleaved pro- and anti-saccades, we show a surprising diversity of state-dependent effects of ICMS-SEF. Short-duration ICMS-SEF passed around cue presentation selectively disrupted anti-saccades by increasing reaction times and error rates bilaterally, and also recruited neck muscles, favoring contralateral head turning to a greater degree on anti-saccade trials. These results are consistent with the functional relevance of the SEF for anti-saccades. The multiplicity of stimulation-evoked effects, with ICMS-SEF simultaneously disrupting anti-saccade performance and facilitating contralateral head orienting, probably reflects both the diversity of cortical and subcortical targets of SEF projections, and the response of this oculomotor network to stimulation. We speculate that the bilateral disruption of anti-saccades arises via feedback loops that may include the thalamus, whereas neck muscle recruitment arises via feedforward polysynaptic pathways to the motor periphery. Consideration of both sets of results reveals a more complete picture of the highly complex and multiphasic response to ICMS-SEF that can play out differently in different effector systems.

show abstract

Recruitment of a contralateral head turning synergy by stimulation of monkey supplementary eye fields

Abstract: Chapman BB, Pace MA, Cushing SL, Corneil BD. Recruitment of a contralateral head turning synergy by stimulation of monkey supplementary eye fields.

Cited by 16 publications

References 78 publications

Validation of a within-trial measure of the oculomotor stop process

Validation of a within-trial measure of the oculomotor stop process

Visuomotor Functions in the Frontal Lobe

Short‐duration stimulation of the supplementary eye fields perturbs anti‐saccade performance while potentiating contralateral head orienting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About