scholarly journals Role of expected reward in frontal eye field during natural scene search

2016 ◽  
Vol 116 (2) ◽  
pp. 645-657 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua I. Glaser ◽  
Daniel K. Wood ◽  
Patrick N. Lawlor ◽  
Pavan Ramkumar ◽  
Konrad P. Kording ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Neural Activity ◽  
Search Task ◽  
Behavioral Changes ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Natural Scene ◽  
Firing Rates ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Movement Representation

When a saccade is expected to result in a reward, both neural activity in oculomotor areas and the saccade itself (e.g., its vigor and latency) are altered (compared with when no reward is expected). As such, it is unclear whether the correlations of neural activity with reward indicate a representation of reward beyond a movement representation; the modulated neural activity may simply represent the differences in motor output due to expected reward. Here, to distinguish between these possibilities, we trained monkeys to perform a natural scene search task while we recorded from the frontal eye field (FEF). Indeed, when reward was expected (i.e., saccades to the target), FEF neurons showed enhanced responses. Moreover, when monkeys accidentally made eye movements to the target, firing rates were lower than when they purposively moved to the target. Thus, neurons were modulated by expected reward rather than simply the presence of the target. We then fit a model that simultaneously included components related to expected reward and saccade parameters. While expected reward led to shorter latency and higher velocity saccades, these behavioral changes could not fully explain the increased FEF firing rates. Thus, FEF neurons appear to encode motivational factors such as reward expectation, above and beyond the kinematic and behavioral consequences of imminent reward.

Vergence Eye Movements

2015 ◽  
pp. 520-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. John Leigh ◽  
David S. Zee
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Developmental Disorders ◽  
Laboratory Evaluation ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Pontine Nuclei ◽  
Convergence Insufficiency ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Phoria Adaptation ◽  
Visual Cortical

This chapter reviews the stimuli for vergence, the properties of fusional and accommodative vergence, as well as vergence made in combination with saccades or vestibular eye movements, or blinks. Different properties of horizontal, vertical, and torsional vergence are discussed. Current models are presented to account for interactions between vergence and saccades. The neural substrate for vergence movements is reviewed from ocular motoneurons to the midbrain supraoculomotor area, to visual cortical areas such as MST and frontal eye field, including pontine nuclei, cerebellar vermis, and fastigial nucleus. Adaptive properties of vergence are reviewed, especially phoria adaptation, discussing the role of the cerebellum. The bedside and laboratory evaluation of vergence is summarized and the pathophysiology of disorders of vergence discussed, including developmental disorders associated with childhood strabismus and acquired disorders such as convergence spasm, convergence insufficiency, vergence forms of nystagmus such as convergence-retraction nystagmus, and effects of focal pontine lesions.

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of the Human Frontal Eye Field: Effects on Visual Perception and Attention

2002 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 1109-1120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-Hélène Grosbras ◽  
Tomáš Paus
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Visual Detection ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Target Onset ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
The Right

When looking at one object, human subjects can shift their attention to another object in their visual field without moving the eyes. Such shifts of attention activate the same brain regions as those involved in the execution of eye movements. Here we investigate the role of one of the main cortical oculomotor area, namely, the frontal eye field (FEF), in shifts of attention. We used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), a technique known to disrupt transiently eye-movements preparation. We hypothesized that if the FEF is a necessary element in the network involved in shifting attention without moving the eyes, then TMS should also disrupt visuospatial attention. For each volunteer, we positioned the TMS coil over the probabilistic anatomical location of the FEF, and we verified that single pulses delayed eye movements. We then applied TMS during a visuospatial attention task. In this task, a central arrow directed shifts of attention and the subject responded by a keypress to a subsequent visual peripheral target without moving the eyes from the central fixation point. In a few trials, the cue was invalid or uninformative, yielding slower responses than when the cue was valid. We delivered single pulses either 53 msec before or 70 msec after target onset. Contrary to our prediction, the main effect of the stimulation was a decrease in reaction time when it was applied 53 msec before target onset. TMS over the left hemisphere facilitated responses to targets in the right hemifield only and for all cueing conditions, whereas TMS over the right hemisphere had a bilateral effect for valid and neutral but not invalid cueing. Thus, TMS interfered with shift of attention only in the case of right hemisphere stimulation: it increased the cost of invalid cueing. Our results suggest that TMS over the FEF facilitates visual detection, and thereby reduces reaction time. This finding provides new insights into the role of the human FEF in processing visual information. The functional asymmetry observed for both facilitation of visual detection and interference with shifts of attention provides further evidence for the dominance of the right hemisphere for those processes. Our results also underline that the disruptive or facilitative effect of TMS over a given region depends upon the behavioral context.

Activity of fixation neurons in the monkey frontal eye field during smooth pursuit eye movements

2014 ◽  
Vol 112 (2) ◽  
pp. 249-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshiko Izawa ◽  
Hisao Suzuki
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Smooth Pursuit ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Smooth Pursuit Eye Movements ◽  
Pursuit Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Catch Up ◽  
Discharge Patterns ◽  
Reduced Activity

We recorded the activity of fixation neurons in the frontal eye field (FEF) in trained monkeys and analyzed their activity during smooth pursuit eye movements. Fixation neurons were densely located in the area of the FEF in the caudal part of the arcuate gyrus facing the inferior arcuate sulcus where focal electrical stimulation suppressed the generation of saccades and smooth pursuit in bilateral directions at an intensity lower than the threshold for eliciting electrically evoked saccades. Whereas fixation neurons discharged tonically during fixation, they showed a variety of discharge patterns during smooth pursuit, ranging from a decrease in activity to an increase in activity. Of these, more than two-thirds were found to show a reduction in activity during smooth pursuit in the ipsilateral and bilateral directions. The reduction in activity of fixation neurons began at pursuit initiation and continued during pursuit maintenance. When catch-up saccades during the initiation of pursuit were eliminated by a step-ramp target routine, the reduced activity of fixation neurons remained. The reduction in activity during pursuit was not dependent on the activity during fixation without a target. Based on these results, we discuss the role of the FEF at maintaining fixation in relation to various other brain areas. We suggest that fixation neurons in the FEF contribute to the suppression of smooth pursuit. These results suggest that FEF fixation neurons are part of a more generalized visual fixation system through which suppressive control is exerted on smooth pursuit, as well as saccades.

scholarly journals Disparity Sensitivity of Frontal Eye Field Neurons

2000 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 625-629 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Ferraina ◽  
Martin Paré ◽  
Robert H. Wurtz
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Dimensional Space ◽  
Visual Stimuli ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Visual Responses ◽  
Motor Processes ◽  
Uncrossed Disparity ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Three Dimensional Space

Information about depth is necessary to generate saccades to visual stimuli located in three-dimensional space. To determine whether monkey frontal eye field (FEF) neurons play a role in the visuo-motor processes underlying this behavior, we studied their visual responses to stimuli at different disparities. Disparity sensitivity was tested from 3° of crossed disparity (near) to 3° degrees of uncrossed disparity (far). The responses of about two thirds of FEF visual and visuo-movement neurons were sensitive to disparity and showed a broad tuning in depth for near or far disparities. Early phasic and late tonic visual responses often displayed different disparity sensitivity. These findings provide evidence of depth-related signals in FEF and suggest a role for FEF in the control of disconjugate as well as conjugate eye movements.

Effects of unilateral frontal eye-field lesions on eye-head coordination in monkey

1986 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 696-714 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. van der Steen ◽  
I. S. Russell ◽  
G. O. James
Keyword(s):  
Visual Search ◽  
Search Task ◽  
Visual Search Task ◽  
Peak Velocity ◽  
Head Movements ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Behavioral Task ◽  
Direct Gaze ◽  
Relative Neglect ◽  
Eye Field

We studied the effects of unilateral frontal eye-field (FEF) lesions on eye-head coordination in monkeys that were trained to perform a visual search task. Eye and head movements were recorded with the scleral search coil technique using phase angle detection in a homogeneous electromagnetic field. In the visual search task all three animals showed a neglect for stimuli presented in the field contralateral to the lesion. In two animals the neglect disappeared within 2-3 wk. One animal had a lasting deficit. We found that FEF lesions that are restricted to area 8 cause only temporary deficits in eye and head movements. Up to a week after the lesion the animals had a strong preference to direct gaze and head to the side ipsilateral to the lesion. Animals tracked objects in contralateral space with combined eye and head movements, but failed to do this with the eyes alone. It was found that within a few days after the lesion, eye and head movements in the direction of the target were initiated, but they were inadequate and had long latencies. Within 1 wk latencies had regained preoperative values. Parallel with the recovery on the behavioral task, head movements became more prominent than before the lesion. Four weeks after the lesion, peak velocity of the head movement had increased by a factor of two, whereas the duration showed a twofold decrease compared with head movements before the lesion. No effects were seen on the duration and peak velocity of gaze. After the recovery on the behavioral task had stabilized, a relative neglect in the hemifield contralateral to the lesion could still be demonstrated by simultaneously presenting two stimuli in the left and right visual hemifields. The neglect is not due to a sensory deficit, but to a disorder of programming. The recovery from unilateral neglect after a FEF lesion is the result of a different orienting behavior, in which head movements become more important. It is concluded that the FEF plays an important role in the organization and coordination of eye and head movements and that lesions of this area result in subtle but permanent changes in eye-head coordination.

scholarly journals TMS over the Human Frontal Eye Field Distorts Perceptual Stability across Eye Movements

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 518-518
Author(s):  
F. Ostendorf ◽  
J. Kilias ◽  
C. Ploner
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Perceptual Stability ◽  
Eye Field

Saccadic Dyskinesia, Other Involuntary Eye Movements, and Gaze Deviations

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnes Wong
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Eye Movements ◽  
Normal Subjects ◽  
Mesencephalic Reticular Formation ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Square Wave ◽  
Central Mesencephalic Reticular Formation ◽  
Cerebellar Diseases ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Small Saccade

■ A small saccade of 0.5–3° that takes the eye away from fixation, followed by a saccade that returns the eye back to fixation after about 200 msec (i.e., presence of intersaccadic interval during which visual feedback occurs) ■ So named because of its appearance in eye movement tracings ■ Normal subjects often have square wave jerks (SWJ), but the rate is only 4–6 per minute. ■ Pathologic SWJ occurs at a rate of >15 per minute. ■ Cerebellar diseases Square wave jerks result from damage of projections from the frontal eye field, rostral pole of the superior colliculus, and the central mesencephalic reticular formation to the omnipause cells in the pons. If symptomatic, SWJ may be treated with methylphenidate, diazepam, phenobarbital, or amphetamines. ■ Burst of saccades with defective steps of innervation (i.e., stepless saccades) ■ Conjugate or monocular Saccadic pulses are associated with multiple sclerosis. Saccadic pulses result from damage of omnipause cells or the neural integrator.

scholarly journals Electrical Stimulation of the Frontal Eye Field in a Monkey Produces Combined Eye and Head Movements

2000 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 1103-1106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyson A. Tu ◽  
E. Gregory Keating
Keyword(s):  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Eye Movements ◽  
Head Movements ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Gaze Shifts ◽  
Gaze Shift ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
A Site ◽  
Head Rotations ◽  
Stimulation Of

The frontal eye field (FEF), an area in the primate frontal lobe, has long been considered important for the production of eye movements. Past studies have evoked saccade-like movements from the FEF using electrical stimulation in animals that were not allowed to move their heads. Using electrical stimulation in two monkeys that were free to move their heads, we have found that the FEF produces gaze shifts that are composed of both eye and head movements. Repeated stimulation at a site evoked gaze shifts of roughly constant amplitude. However, that gaze shift could be accomplished with varied amounts of head and eye movements, depending on their (head and eye) respective starting positions. This evidence suggests that the FEF controls visually orienting movements using both eye and head rotations rather than just shifting the eyes as previously thought.

Dorsal Prefrontal Cortex

2021 ◽  
pp. 191-235
Author(s):  
Richard E. Passingham
Keyword(s):  
Prefrontal Cortex ◽  
Eye Movements ◽  
Frontal Eye Field ◽  
Intraparietal Sulcus ◽  
Order Information ◽  
Shape Information ◽  
Eye Field ◽  
Orbital Prefrontal Cortex ◽  
Ventral Prefrontal Cortex ◽  
Premotor Areas

The dorsal prefrontal (PF) cortex generates and plans the goals or targets for foveal search and manual foraging. The goals are conditional on the relative recency of prior events and actions, and the connections of areas 9/46 and 46 explain how these areas can support the ability to generate the next goal. Area 9/46 can generate sequences of eye movements because it has visuospatial inputs from the cortex in the intraparietal sulcus and outputs to the frontal eye field and superior colliculus. Area 46 can generate sequences of hand and arm movements because it has inputs from the inferior parietal areas PFG and SII and outputs to the forelimb regions of the premotor areas and thence to the motor cortex. Both areas get timing and order information indirectly from the parietal cortex and hippocampus, and colour and shape information from the ventral prefrontal cortex. Inputs from the orbital prefrontal cortex enable both areas to integrate generate goals in accordance with current needs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document