JN Ad Instruments
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol 99: 2281-2290, 2008. First published March 19, 2008; doi:10.1152/jn.01281.2007
0022-3077/08 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
99/5/2281    most recent
01281.2007v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Van Pelt, S.
Right arrow Articles by Medendorp, W. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Van Pelt, S.
Right arrow Articles by Medendorp, W. P.

Updating Target Distance Across Eye Movements in Depth

Stan Van Pelt1 and W. Pieter Medendorp1,2

1Nijmegen Institute for Cognition and Information, 2FC Donders Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Submitted 23 November 2007; accepted in final form 16 March 2008

We tested between two coding mechanisms that the brain may use to retain distance information about a target for a reaching movement across vergence eye movements. If the brain was to encode a retinal disparity representation (retinal model), i.e., target depth relative to the plane of fixation, each vergence eye movement would require an active update of this representation to preserve depth constancy. Alternatively, if the brain was to store an egocentric distance representation of the target by integrating retinal disparity and vergence signals at the moment of target presentation, this representation should remain stable across subsequent vergence shifts (nonretinal model). We tested between these schemes by measuring errors of human reaching movements (n = 14 subjects) to remembered targets, briefly presented before a vergence eye movement. For comparison, we also tested their directional accuracy across version eye movements. With intervening vergence shifts, the memory-guided reaches showed an error pattern that was based on the new eye position and on the depth of the remembered target relative to that position. This suggests that target depth is recomputed after the gaze shift, supporting the retinal model. Our results also confirm earlier literature showing retinal updating of target direction. Furthermore, regression analyses revealed updating gains close to one for both target depth and direction, suggesting that the errors arise after the updating stage during the subsequent reference frame transformations that are involved in reaching.


Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: W. P. Medendorp, Nijmegen Institute for Cognition and Information, Radboud University Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9104, NL-6500 HE, Nijmegen, The Netherlands (E-mail: p.medendorp{at}nici.ru.nl)




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
S. M. Beurze, F. P. de Lange, I. Toni, and W. P. Medendorp
Spatial and Effector Processing in the Human Parietofrontal Network for Reaches and Saccades
J Neurophysiol, June 1, 2009; 101(6): 3053 - 3062.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2008 by the The American Physiological Society.