Visual-vestibular interactions in the vestibular nuclei of the goldfish

Abstract

The responses of vestibular nuclei neurons of relaxed unanaesthetized goldfish have been examined with trapezoid velocity stimuli under three conditions. Responses to horizontal body rotation in the dark (pure vestibular stimulation) resemble those observed in vestibular nerve afferents. Optokinetic responses to exclusive visual surround-motion are also direction-specific and, in contrast to vestibular responses, exhibit a tonic response to constant velocity. They show three different response profiles, classified A,B or C, based on the neuron's discharge rate: either increasing, decreasing or remaining constant once surround motion is maintained at constant velocity. Following these dynamic effects, optokinetic responses have a maintained modulation of resting discharge until deceleration commences. The time constants associated with the dynamic effects vary between 1 and 11 seconds. Steady-state modulation of optokinetic responses shows a weak relation to stimulus velocities exceeding 10 deg/sec. Responses to body rotation in the light were found to linearly combine the weighted vestibular and optokinetic responses so that accurate velocity information is available for sensory and motor functions independent of the neuron's vestibular (I,II) or optokinetic (A,B,C) response type. The principle of this visual-vestibular interaction is discussed with respect to multisensory processing within the vestibular nuclei.

The effect of visual-vestibular conflict on the latency of steady-state visually induced subjective rotation

“…This has been confirmed by a growing body of neurophysiological literature showing strong visual-vestibular interactions during full-field visual stimulation (Allum, Graf, Dichgans, & Schmidt, 1976;Dichgans & Brandt, 1978;Dichgans, Schmidt, & Graf, 1973;Gaunton & Thomsen, 1976;Henn, Young, & Finley, 1974;Waespe & Henn, 1977). The vestibular system, though sensitive to acceleration, does not respond to constant velocity motion.…”

Influence of Stimulation of the Visual System on the Activity of Vestibular Nuclear Neurons in the Frog

“…However, optokinetic responses were lacking. This seems, at first, unex pected, since in goldfish [Dichgans et al, 1973;Allum et al, 1976] and mammals [ Waespe and Henn, 1979;Precht and Strata, 1980;Cazin et al, 1980a] secondorder vestibular neurons respond to mo tion of the visual field. The visual system of the frog is obviously sensitive to opto kinetic stimulus [Ansorge and GrusserCornehls, 1977;Katte and Hoffmann, 1980;Dieringer and Precht, 1982], and al though the rotation speed used in the pres ent study could seem inadequate, we have verified, in 5 frogs, that it was able to elicit optokinetic head movements.…”

Perceived orientation, motion, and configuration of the body during viewing of an off-vertical, rotating surface

“…The authors' mailing address is: Ashton Graybiel Spatial Orientation Laboratory, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA 02254. 39 vestibular nuclei whose discharge rates are influenced by both body motion, as signaled by the vestibular end organs, and visual motion (Allum, Graf, Dichgans, & Schmidt, 1976;Azzena, Azzena, & Marini, 1974;Henn, Young, & Finley, 1974;Waespe & Henn, 1977). Convergences of vision, audition, somatosensation, and proprioception at the cellular level in the vestibular nuclei have been demonstrated (Daunton & Thomsen, 1979;Duensing & Schaefer, 1958;Rubin, Liedgren, Milne, Young, & Fredrickson, 1977;Thoden, Golsong, & Wirbitzky, 1975;Wilson, Kato, Thomas, & Peterson, 1966).…”