Self-control during response conflict by human supplementary eye field

2003 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masud Husain ◽  
Andrew Parton ◽  
Timothy L. Hodgson ◽  
Dominic Mort ◽  
Geraint Rees
Keyword(s):  
Response Conflict ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field

Visually guided saccade versus eye-hand reach: contrasting neuronal activity in the cortical supplementary and frontal eye fields

1996 ◽  
Vol 75 (5) ◽  
pp. 2187-2191 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Mushiake ◽  
N. Fujii ◽  
J. Tanji
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movement ◽  
Neuronal Activity ◽  
Motor Task ◽  
Oculomotor Control ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Frontal Eye Fields ◽  
Saccadic Eye Movement ◽  
Visually Guided ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field

1. We studied neuronal activity in the supplementary eye field (SEF) and frontal eye field (FEF) of a monkey during performance of a conditional motor task that required capturing of a target either with a saccadic eye movement (the saccade-only condition) or with an eye-hand reach (the saccade-and-reach condition), according to visual instructions. 2. Among 106 SEF neurons that showed presaccadic activity, more than one-half of them (54%) were active preferentially under the saccade-only condition (n = 12) or under the saccade-and-reach condition (n = 45), while the remaining 49 neurons were equally active in both conditions. 3. By contrast, most (97%) of the 109 neurons in the FEF exhibited approximately equal activity in relation to saccades under the two conditions. 4. The present results suggest the possibility that SEF neurons, at least in part, are involved in signaling whether the motor task is oculomotor or combined eye-arm movements, whereas FEF neurons are mostly related to oculomotor control.

Evidence for a supplementary eye field

1987 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Schlag ◽  
M. Schlag-Rey
Keyword(s):  
Unit Activity ◽  
Cortical Neurons ◽  
Cortical Area ◽  
Head Movements ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Unit Recording ◽  
Electrical Microstimulation ◽  
Preferred Direction ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field

Electrical microstimulation and unit recording were performed in dorsomedial frontal cortex of four alert monkeys to identify an oculomotor area whose existence had been postulated rostral to the supplementary motor area. Contraversive saccades were evoked from 129 sites by stimulation. Threshold currents were lower than 20 microA in half the tests. Response latencies were usually longer than 50 ms (minimum: 30 ms). Eye movements were occasionally accompanied by blinks, ear, or neck movements. The cortical area yielding these movements was at the superior edge of the frontal lobe just rostral to the region from which limb movements could be elicited. Depending on the site of stimulation, saccades varied between two extremes: from having rather uniform direction and size, to converging toward a goal defined in space. The transition between these extremes was gradual with no evidence that these two types were fundamentally different. From surface to depth of cortex, direction and amplitude of evoked saccades were similar or changed progressively. No clear systematization was found depending on location along rostrocaudal or mediolateral axes of the cortex. The dorsomedial oculomotor area mapped was approximately 7 mm long and 6 mm wide. Combined eye and head movements were elicited from one of ten sites stimulated when the head was unrestrained. In the other nine cases, saccades were not accompanied by head rotation, even when higher currents or longer stimulus trains were applied. Presaccadic unit activity was recorded from 62 cells. Each of these cells had a preferred direction that corresponded to the direction of the movement evoked by local microstimulation. Presaccadic activity occurred with self-initiated as well as visually triggered saccades. It often led self-initiated saccades by more than 300 ms. Recordings made with the head free showed that the firing could not be interpreted as due to attempted head movements. Many dorsomedial cortical neurons responded to photic stimuli, either phasically or tonically. Sustained responses (activation or inhibition) were observed during target fixation. Twenty-one presaccadic units showed tonic changes of activity with fixation. Justification is given for considering the cortical area studied as a supplementary eye field. It shares many common properties with the arcuate frontal eye field. Differences noted in this study include: longer latency of response to electrical stimulation, possibility to evoke saccades converging apparently toward a goal, and long-lead unit activity with spontaneous saccades.

scholarly journals Microstimulation supports a causal role for the supplementary eye field in an oculomotor decision

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 529-529
Author(s):  
S. Heinen ◽  
S.-n. Yang ◽  
J. Ford
Keyword(s):  
Causal Role ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field

scholarly journals Cortical microcircuitry of gaze monitoring in supplementary eye field

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (10) ◽  
pp. 306c
Author(s):  
Steven P Errington ◽  
Amirsaman Sajad ◽  
Jeffrey D Schall
Keyword(s):  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field

scholarly journals Combination of Neuronal Signals Representing Object-Centered Location and Saccade Direction in Macaque Supplementary Eye Field

2007 ◽  
Vol 97 (5) ◽  
pp. 3554-3566 ◽  
Author(s):  
David E. Moorman ◽  
Carl R. Olson
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Direction Selectivity ◽  
Transitional Stage ◽  
Spatial Selectivity ◽  
Supplementary Eye Field ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Saccade Direction

Neurons in the macaque supplementary eye field (SEF) fire at different rates in conjunction with planning saccades in different directions. They also exhibit object-centered spatial selectivity, firing at different rates when the target of the saccade is at the left or right end of a horizontal bar. To compare the rate of incidence of the two kinds of signal, and to determine how they combine, we recorded from SEF neurons while monkeys performed a task in which the target (a dot or the left or right end of a horizontal bar) could appear in any visual field quadrant. During the period when the target was visible on the screen and the monkey was preparing to make a saccade, many neurons exhibited selectivity for saccade direction, firing at a rate determined by the direction of the impending saccade irrespective of whether the target was a dot or the end of a bar. On bar trials, many of the same neurons exhibited object-centered selectivity, firing more strongly when the target was at the preferred end of the bar regardless of saccade direction. The rate of incidence of object-centered selectivity (33%) was lower overall than that of saccade-direction selectivity (56%). Signals related to saccade direction and the object-centered location of the target tended to combine additively. The results suggest that the SEF is at a transitional stage between representing the object-centered command and specifying the parameters of the saccade.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document