HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 94/1/186    most recent 00904.2004v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (18) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Merfeld, D. M. Articles by Wood, S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Merfeld, D. M. Articles by Wood, S.

Vestibular Perception and Action Employ Qualitatively Different Mechanisms. I. Frequency Response of VOR and Perceptual Responses During Translation and Tilt

¹Jenks Vestibular Physiology Lab, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, Massachusetts; ²Department of Otology and Laryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; and ³Neurotology Research, Legacy Clinical Research and Technology Center, Portland, Oregon

Submitted 31 August 2004; accepted in final form 13 February 2005

To investigate the neural mechanisms that humans use to process the ambiguous force measured by the otolith organs, we measured vestibuloocular reflexes (VORs) and perceptions of tilt and translation. One primary goal was to determine if the same, or different, mechanisms contribute to vestibular perception and action. We used motion paradigms that provided identical sinusoidal inter-aural otolith cues across a broad frequency range. We accomplished this by sinusoidally tilting (20°, 0.005–0.7 Hz) subjects in roll about an earth-horizontal, head-centered, rotation axis ("Tilt") or sinusoidally accelerating (3.3 m/s², 0.005–0.7 Hz) subjects along their inter-aural axis ("Translation"). While identical inter-aural otolith cues were provided by these motion paradigms, the canal cues were substantially different because roll rotations were present during Tilt but not during Translation. We found that perception was dependent on canal cues because the reported perceptions of both roll tilt and inter-aural translation were substantially different during Translation and Tilt. These findings match internal model predictions that rotational cues from the canals influence the neural processing of otolith cues. We also found horizontal translational VORs at frequencies >0.2 Hz during both Translation and Tilt. These responses were dependent on otolith cues and match simple filtering predictions that translational VORs include contributions via simple high-pass filtering of otolith cues. More generally, these findings demonstrate that internal models govern human vestibular "perception" across a broad range of frequencies and that simple high-pass filters contribute to human horizontal translational VORs ("action") at frequencies above 0.2 Hz.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. R. MacNeilage, N. Ganesan, and D. E. Angelaki Computational Approaches to Spatial Orientation: From Transfer Functions to Dynamic Bayesian Inference J Neurophysiol, December 1, 2008; 100(6): 2981 - 2996. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Yakusheva, P. M. Blazquez, and D. E. Angelaki Frequency-Selective Coding of Translation and Tilt in Macaque Cerebellar Nodulus and Uvula J. Neurosci., October 1, 2008; 28(40): 9997 - 10009. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. L. McArthur and J. D. Dickman Canal and Otolith Contributions to Compensatory Tilt Responses in Pigeons J Neurophysiol, September 1, 2008; 100(3): 1488 - 1497. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. N. Lorincz and B. J. M. Hess Dynamic Effects on the Subjective Visual Vertical After Roll Rotation J Neurophysiol, August 1, 2008; 100(2): 657 - 669. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. F. Lewis, C. Haburcakova, and D. M. Merfeld Roll Tilt Psychophysics in Rhesus Monkeys During Vestibular and Visual Stimulation J Neurophysiol, July 1, 2008; 100(1): 140 - 153. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R.A.A. Vingerhoets, W. P. Medendorp, and J.A.M. Van Gisbergen Body-Tilt and Visual Verticality Perception During Multiple Cycles of Roll Rotation J Neurophysiol, May 1, 2008; 99(5): 2264 - 2280. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R.A.A. Vingerhoets, J.A.M. Van Gisbergen, and W. P. Medendorp Verticality Perception During Off-Vertical Axis Rotation J Neurophysiol, May 1, 2007; 97(5): 3256 - 3268. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. A. Yong, G. D. Paige, and S. H. Seidman Multiple Sensory Cues Underlying the Perception of Translation and Path J Neurophysiol, February 1, 2007; 97(2): 1100 - 1113. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. Zhou, B. F. Tang, S. D. Newlands, and W. M. King Responses of Monkey Vestibular-Only Neurons to Translation and Angular Rotation J Neurophysiol, December 1, 2006; 96(6): 2915 - 2930. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Park, C. Gianna-Poulin, F. O. Black, S. Wood, and D. M. Merfeld Roll Rotation Cues Influence Roll Tilt Perception Assayed Using a Somatosensory Technique J Neurophysiol, July 1, 2006; 96(1): 486 - 491. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R.A.A. Vingerhoets, W. P. Medendorp, and J.A.M. Van Gisbergen Time Course and Magnitude of Illusory Translation Perception During Off-Vertical Axis Rotation J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2006; 95(3): 1571 - 1587. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. G. Kaptein and J. A.M. Van Gisbergen Canal and Otolith Contributions to Visual Orientation Constancy During Sinusoidal Roll Rotation J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2006; 95(3): 1936 - 1948. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. M. Merfeld, S. Park, C. Gianna-Poulin, F. O. Black, and S. Wood Vestibular Perception and Action Employ Qualitatively Different Mechanisms. II. VOR and Perceptual Responses During Combined Tilt&Translation J Neurophysiol, July 1, 2005; 94(1): 199 - 205. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]