Recruitment of a Head-Turning Synergy by Low-Frequency Activity in the Primate Superior Colliculus

Rezvani, Sam; Corneil, Brian D.

doi:10.1152/jn.90223.2008

Cited by 61 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2C). The quick change of RTst for the contingency reversal is consistent with previous findings (Watanabe and Hikosaka, 2005;Rezvani and Corneil, 2008).…”

Section: Responses In the Transition Phase Of Cue-reward Contingency supporting

confidence: 92%

Different Pedunculopontine Tegmental Neurons Signal Predicted and Actual Task Rewards

Okada

Toyama²,

Inoue³

et al. 2009

J. Neurosci.

103

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dopamine system has been implicated in guiding behavior based on rewards. The pedunculopontine tegmental nucleus (PPTN) of the brainstem receives afferent inputs from reward-related structures, including the cerebral cortices and the basal ganglia, and in turn provides strong excitatory projections to dopamine neurons. This anatomical evidence predicts that PPTN neurons may carry reward information. To elucidate the functional role of the PPTN in reward-seeking behavior, we recorded single PPTN neurons while monkeys performed a visually guided saccade task in which the predicted reward value was informed by the shape of the fixation target. Two distinct groups of neurons, fixation target (FT) and reward delivery (RD) neurons, carried reward information. The activity of FT neurons persisted between FT onset and reward delivery, with the level of activity associated with the magnitude of the expected reward. RD neurons discharged phasically after reward delivery, with the levels of activity associated with the actual reward. These results suggest that separate populations of PPTN neurons signal predicted and actual reward values, both of which are necessary for the computation of reward prediction error as represented by dopamine neurons.

show abstract

“…2C). The quick change of RTst for the contingency reversal is consistent with previous findings (Watanabe and Hikosaka, 2005;Rezvani and Corneil, 2008).…”

Section: Responses In the Transition Phase Of Cue-reward Contingency supporting

confidence: 92%

Different Pedunculopontine Tegmental Neurons Signal Predicted and Actual Task Rewards

Okada

Toyama²,

Inoue³

et al. 2009

J. Neurosci.

103

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The VOR cannot be modulated by a head command alone, because the head was not moving actively during our experiment. However, several studies have shown that neck muscles are activated during stimulation of the superior colliculus (Corneil et al, 2002;Rezvani and Corneil, 2008) or the frontal eye fields (Corneil et al, 2010), even when the monkey does not make a head movement. Other studies, using neck muscles recordings with EMG in humans showed tonic and phasic neck muscles activity in absence of head movement (André-Deshays et al, 1988, 1991.…”

Section: Vor Modulation As a Function Of Gaze Amplitudementioning

confidence: 99%

Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex Suppression during Head-Fixed Saccades Reveals Gaze Feedback Control

Daye

Roberts²,

Zee

et al. 2015

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous experiments have shown that the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) is partially suppressed during large head-free gaze (gaze ϭ eye-in-head ϩ head-in-space) shifts when both the eyes and head are moving actively, on a fixed body, or when the eyes are moving actively and the head passively on a fixed body. We tested, in human subjects, the hypothesis that the VOR is also suppressed during gaze saccades made with en bloc, head and body together, rotations. Subjects made saccades by following a target light. During some trials, the chair rotated so as to move the entire body passively before, during, or after a saccade. The modulation of the VOR was a function of both saccade amplitude and the time of the head perturbation relative to saccade onset. Despite the perturbation, gaze remained accurate. Thus, VOR modulation is similar when gaze changes are programmed for the eyes alone or for the eyes and head moving together. We propose that the brain always programs a change in gaze using feedback based on gaze and head signals, rather than on separate eye and head trajectories.

show abstract

“…However, it is unlikely that either of these mechanisms could directly recruit the antagonist muscle activity observed on head-only errors. Increasing levels of activity of movementrelated neurons in the SC is correlated with increasing levels of agonist, not antagonist, neck muscle activity (Rezvani and Corneil 2008). Moreover, stimulation in the rostral SC or the lateral FEF (near fixation-related neurons) never evokes a profile of neck muscle activity resembling active braking but instead evokes weak agonist muscle recruitment associated with small-amplitude gaze shifts (Corneil et al 2002a;Elsley et al 2007;Guitton and Mandl 1978;Roucoux et al 1980).…”

Section: How Is the Oculomotor Stop Process Integrated Into Head Movementioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, low-current stimulation of either the superior colliculus (SC) or frontal eye fields (FEF) can generate neck EMG activity and head movements without initiating gaze shifts (Corneil et al 2002a(Corneil et al ,b, 2010Pélisson et al 2001). Processes known to increase low-frequency preparatory activity within the SC also produce similar levels of neck muscle activity prior to gaze shifts Rezvani and Corneil 2008). Thus developing oculomotor programs can drive head movements even while a decision to commit to a gaze shift is ongoing.…”

Section: Neurophysiology Of Controlling Eye-head Gaze Shiftsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Within Trial Measure of the Stop Signal Reaction Time in a Head-Unrestrained Oculomotor Countermanding Task

Goonetilleke¹,

Doherty

2010

Journal of Neurophysiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Goonetilleke SC, Doherty TJ, Corneil BD. A within trial measure of the stop signal reaction time in a head-unrestrained oculomotor countermanding task. J Neurophysiol 104: 3677-3690, 2010. First published October 20, 2010 doi:10.1152/jn.00495.2010. The countermanding (or stop-signal) task, which requires the cancellation of an impending response on the infrequent presentation of a stop signal, enables study of the contextual control of movement generation and suppression. Here we present a novel and empirical measure of the time needed to cancel an impending gaze shift by recording neck muscle activity during a head-unrestrained oculomotor countermanding paradigm. On a subset of STOP signal trials, subjects generated small head movements toward a target even though gaze remained stable due to a compensatory vestibular-ocular reflex. On such trials, we observed a burst of antagonist neck muscle activity during the small head-only error. Such antagonist neck muscle activity served as an active braking pulse as its magnitude scaled with the kinematics of the head-only error. This activity was selective for trials in which the head was arrested in mid-flight and did not appear on trials without a stop signal, on noncancelled STOP signal trials when the gaze shift was completed, or on STOP signal trials without head motion. Importantly, the timing of this antagonist activity related best to the onset of the stop signal (lagging it by ϳ180 ms), and strongly correlated with behavioral estimates of the time needed to cancel a movement (the stop signal reaction time). These results are consistent with the notion that such selective antagonist neck muscle activity arises as a peripheral expression of the oculomotor STOP process that successfully cancelled the gaze shift. Studying movement cancellation within nested systems like the head-unrestrained gaze shifting system offers a unique opportunity for investigating underlying neural mechanisms as the overall goal (i.e., to cancel a gaze shift) can be achieved despite motion of other components; on such individual trials, the oculomotor STOP process is expressed as an active braking pulse.

show abstract

Recruitment of a Head-Turning Synergy by Low-Frequency Activity in the Primate Superior Colliculus

Cited by 61 publications

References 73 publications

Different Pedunculopontine Tegmental Neurons Signal Predicted and Actual Task Rewards

Different Pedunculopontine Tegmental Neurons Signal Predicted and Actual Task Rewards

Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex Suppression during Head-Fixed Saccades Reveals Gaze Feedback Control

A Within Trial Measure of the Stop Signal Reaction Time in a Head-Unrestrained Oculomotor Countermanding Task

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About