Aerospace Medical Research Unit, Department of Physiology, McGill
University, Montreal, Quebec H3G 1Y6, Canada
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The vestibular system
is classically associated with detecting the motion of the
head-in-space to generate the reflexes that are
crucial for our daily activities, such as stabilizing gaze (gaze = eye-in-head + head-in-space) via the vestibuloocular reflex (VOR)
during walking and running (Grossman et al. 1988
, 1989
). During passive whole-body rotation in head-restrained animals, vestibular afferents originating in the semicircular canals encode the
angular velocity of the head-in-space (Goldberg and Fernandez 1971
). These vestibular afferents, in turn, project to
second-order neurons within the vestibular nuclei, which encode angular
head velocity during the compensatory eye movements generated by the VOR (Cullen and McCrea 1993
; McCrea et al.
1987
; Scudder and Fuchs 1992
). However, in
addition to input from the vestibular nerve, the vestibular nuclei
receive projections from many structures that could influence their
discharge. For example, neurons within oculomotor/gaze control
pathways, such as the saccadic burst neurons in the paramedian pontine
reticular formation, send direct projections to the vestibular nuclei
(Sasaki and Shimazu 1981
). Furthermore, neck
muscle spindle afferents are known to influence the activity of
vestibular nuclei neurons in decerebrate animals (Anastasopoulos and Mergner 1982
; Boyle and Pompeiano 1981
;
Fuller 1988
; Wilson et al. 1990
) via a
disynaptic pathway (Sato et al. 1997
). Moreover, cortical areas, which have been implicated in more cognitive aspects of
vestibular function including the perception of spatial orientation, the ability to navigate (in the absence of visual cues), and gaze control, project to the vestibular nuclei (for review, see
Fukushima 1997
). Thus given the convergence of multiple
inputs to the vestibular nuclei, it is natural to ask how the signals
carried by these inputs are integrated during our daily activities.
Here we have focused on the behavior of a distinct population of
vestibular nuclei neurons termed position-vestibular-pause (PVP)
neurons during horizontal head rotations. Type I PVP neurons are
thought to constitute most of the intermediate leg of the direct VOR
pathway; they receive a strong monosynaptic connection from the
ipsilateral semicircular canal afferents and, in turn, project directly
to the extraocular motoneurons (Cullen and McCrea 1993
; McCrea et al. 1987
; Scudder and
Fuchs 1992
). These neurons derive their name from the signals
they carry during head-restrained oculomotor and vestibular paradigms:
their firing rates increase when the eyes move to more contralaterally
directed positions; during slow phase vestibular
nystagmus, these neurons are sensitive to ipsilateral head rotations
(i.e., a type I response); and their discharges cease
(pause) for ipsilaterally directed saccades and vestibular
quick phases. Type II PVP neurons have oppositely directed eye- and
head-motion sensitivities to those of type I PVP neurons, and their
role in the processing of vestibular information is less well
understood. Nevertheless, in general, they behave in a quantitatively
similar manner to type I PVP neurons during head-restrained rotations
and eye movements (Scudder and Fuchs 1992
).
The first goal of this study was to address the general question of
whether the PVP neuron responses to active and/or passive movements are
modified in a manner that depends on the animal's current behavioral
goal. For example, the response of PVP neurons might be selectively
attenuated for gaze redirection versus stabilization, consistent with
their role in mediating the VOR. Alternatively, it is also possible
that PVP neurons might differentially encode head velocity during
self-generated versus passively applied head-in-space rotations and/or
during rotation of the head and body together in space versus rotation
of the head relative to an earth-stationary body.
On the one hand, there is already much evidence to suggest that type I
PVP neurons differentially encode head-velocity during gaze redirection
versus gaze stabilization. First, while type I PVP neurons encode head
velocity during the compensatory slow phase component of the VOR evoked
by passive whole-body rotation, they pause or cease firing during
vestibular quick phases where gaze is redirected (Cullen and
McCrea 1993
; Fuchs and Kimm 1975
; Keller
and Daniels 1975
; Keller and Kamath 1975
;
Lisberger et al. 1994a
,b
; McConville et al.
1996
; McCrea et al. 1987
; Miles 1975
; Roy and Cullen 1998
; Scudder and
Fuchs 1992
; Tomlinson and Robinson 1984
).
Second, when gaze is voluntarily redirected using coordinated eye-head
gaze shifts, the head-velocity signal carried by type I PVP neurons is
significantly attenuated as compared with passive whole-body rotation
(Cullen and McCrea 1993
; McCrea et al.
1996
; Roy and Cullen 1998
) in an
amplitude-dependent manner (Roy and Cullen 1998
). Third,
type I PVP neuron responses are attenuated by ~30% as compared with
passive rotation in the dark when monkeys suppress their VOR (and
therefore redirect their gaze to move with the head in space) during
passive whole-body rotation by tracking a target that moves with the
head (Cullen and McCrea 1993
; McCrea et al.
1996
; Roy and Cullen 1998
; Scudder and
Fuchs 1992
).
On the other hand, whether PVP neurons differentially encode
head-velocity during self-generated versus passively applied rotations
of the head-in-space is less clear. It has been proposed that an
enhanced sensitivity of the VOR pathways during active head movements
might increase VOR responses in humans as compared with passive head
motion when the goal is to stabilize gaze (Demer et al.
1993
; Jell et al. 1988
). However, this
behavioral observation remains to be confirmed at the neural level. We
have previously shown (Roy and Cullen 1998
) that type I
PVP neuron discharges in the rhesus monkey are similar during the VOR
elicited by passive whole-body rotation and during the active head
movements made in the time interval that immediately follows a gaze
shift. In this interval, an ocular counter roll compensates for the
residual active head motion such that the monkey's axis of gaze is
stable relative to space. Gdowski and McCrea (1999)
also
reported that the majority of PVP neurons in squirrel monkeys encode
head-in-space motion during simultaneous active and passive head
motion. However, they emphasized that 35% of the neurons were better
related to the passive component of the motion than to the total
head-in-space motion during this same paradigm. While this latter
result is actually the opposite of what would be expected if the
efficacy of the VOR was, in fact, enhanced during active head
movements, its interpretation is limited given that the gaze goal of
the monkeys was not reported.
The second goal of the present study was to determine the neural
mechanism(s) that contribute to the differential processing of
head-velocity information by PVP neurons. For example, during gaze
shifts, there are several possible mechanisms that could modulate PVP
neuron discharges. It is likely that inputs from the brain stem
saccadic burst generator to the vestibular nuclei could function to
suppress PVP neuron responses during voluntary combined eye-head gaze
shifts (Roy and Cullen 1998
). Specifically, burst
neurons in the paramedian pontine reticular formation project to type
II neurons in the vestibular nucleus (Sasaki and Shimazu 1981
), which in turn send an inhibitory projection to type I
PVP neurons (Nakao et al. 1982
). This pathway almost
certainly provides a powerful inhibitory drive to type I PVP neurons
during rapid gaze shifts. It is also possible that inhibitory inputs
from neck proprioceptors contribute to the attenuation of PVP neuron
discharges. Studies in anesthetized animals have shown that the
activation of neck proprioceptors can influence the activity of
vestibular nuclei neurons (Anastasopoulos and Mergner
1982
; Boyle and Pompeiano 1981
; Fuller
1988
; Wilson et al. 1990
). Furthermore, McCrea
and colleagues recently reported that most if not all secondary
vestibular neurons (including type I PVP neurons) in squirrel monkey
are sensitive to passive neck rotation (Gdowski and McCrea 1999
,
2000
; McCrea et al. 1996
). Finally, a signal
related to the voluntary head motion itself, such as an efferent copy
of the motor command to the neck musculature (McCrea et al.
1996
) or a cortically derived signal representing the monkey's
self-generated head motion, could influence the responses of PVP neurons.
To determine how PVP neurons process head-velocity information across a
wide variety of behaviors and to understand the mechanisms that
underlie the observed differential processing, we devised a sequence of
paradigms in which the gaze goal was systematically varied for
externally applied and/or self-generated head movements. We first
characterized the discharges of PVP neurons in the head-restrained condition during passive whole-body rotation when gaze was stable (VOR)
and when gaze was redirected (VOR cancellation paradigm). The neuronal
discharges were then recorded during different gaze control tasks while
the monkey experienced passive rotations of its head-on-body, generated
voluntary head-on-body movements to orient to novel targets or track a
slowly moving target, was passively rotated while simultaneously
generating active head movements, and voluntarily "drove" its head
and body together relative to space. We found that, during active
and/or passive head movements, type I PVP neurons robustly encoded head
velocity whenever monkeys stabilized their gaze relative to space, and
were similarly attenuated during gaze-redirection tasks. Furthermore,
the responses of type II PVP neurons were quantitatively comparable to
those of type I PVP neurons during most behavioral conditions. Our
results support the hypothesis that an efference copy of the brain stem
oculomotor/gaze commands to redirect the visual axis in space underlies
the "on-line" reduction in VOR pathway modulation when the VOR is
functionally inappropriate.
 |
METHODS |
Three rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) were prepared
for chronic extracellular recording using aseptic surgical techniques. All experimental protocols were approved by the McGill University Animal Care Committee and were in compliance with the guidelines of the
Canadian Council on Animal Care.
Surgical procedures
The surgical techniques were similar to those previously
described by Roy and Cullen (2001)
. Briefly, an 18- to
19-mm-diam eye coil (3 loops of Teflon-coated stainless steel wire) was
implanted in the right eye behind the conjunctiva. In addition, a
dental acrylic implant was fastened to each animal's skull using
stainless steel screws. The implant held in place a stainless steel
post used to restrain the animal's head, and a stainless steel
recording chamber that was positioned to access the medial vestibular
nucleus (posterior and lateral angles of 30°). During the surgery
isoflurane gas was utilized to initiate (2-3%) and maintain
(0.8-1.5%) anesthesia. After the surgery, buprenorphine (0.01 mg/kg
im) was utilized for postoperative analgesia, and monkeys were allowed
to recover for 2 wk before commencing experimental sessions.
Data acquisition
At the onset of each experiment, the monkey sat comfortably in a
primate chair, which was placed on a vestibular turntable. With the
monkey initially head-restrained, extracellular single-unit activity
was recorded using enamel-insulated tungsten microelectrodes (7-10
M
impedance, Frederick-Haer) as has been described elsewhere (Roy and Cullen 2001
). The abducens nucleus, which was
identified based on its stereotypical discharge patterns during eye
movements (Cullen et al. 1993
; Sylvestre and
Cullen 1999
), was located and used as a landmark to determine
the location of the medial and lateral vestibular nuclei. Gaze and head
position were measured using the magnetic search coil technique
(Fuchs and Robinson 1966
), and turntable velocity was
measured using an angular velocity sensor (Watson). Unit activity,
horizontal and vertical gaze and head positions, target position, and
table velocity were recorded on DAT tape for later playback. Action
potentials were discriminated during playback using a windowing circuit
(BAK) that was manually set to generate a pulse coincident with the
rising phase of each action potential. Gaze position, head
position, target position, and table velocity signals were
low-pass filtered at 250 Hz (8 pole Bessel filter) and sampled at 1,000 Hz.
Behavioral paradigms
Using juice as a reward, monkeys were trained to follow a target
light (HeNe laser) that was projected, via a system of two galvanometer
controlled mirrors, onto a cylindrical screen located 60 cm away from
the monkey's head. Eye-motion sensitivities to saccades and ocular
fixation were characterized by having the head-restrained monkey attend
to a target that stepped between horizontal positions over a range of
±30°. To determine neuronal eye-motion sensitivities during smooth
pursuit, head-restrained monkeys tracked sinusoidal (0.5 Hz, 80°/s
peak velocity) target motion in the horizontal plane. Head-velocity
sensitivities to passive whole body rotation (0.5 Hz, 80°/s peak
velocity) were tested by rotating monkeys about an earth vertical axis
in the dark [passive whole-body rotation (pWBR)] and while they
cancelled their VOR by fixating a target that moved with the vestibular turntable (pWBRc). Target and turntable motion, and on-line data displays were controlled by a UNIX-based real-time data-acquisition system (REX) (Hayes et al. 1982
).
After a neuron was fully characterized in the head-restrained
condition, the monkey's head was slowly and carefully released to
maintain isolation. Once released, the monkey was able to rotate its
head through the natural range of motion in the yaw (horizontal), pitch
(vertical), and roll (torsional) axes. The response of the same neuron
was then recorded during the voluntary head movements made during
combined eye-head gaze shifts (15-65° in amplitude) and during
combined eye-head gaze pursuit of a sinusoidal target (0.5 Hz, 80°/s
peak velocity). In addition, neuronal responses to combined passive and
active head motion were recorded while head-unrestrained monkeys were
passively rotated (0.5 Hz., 80°/s peak) and allowed to simultaneously
generate voluntary head-on-body movements. A subset of neurons was
tested during a "driving paradigm" in which the monkey moved its
head and body together in space. During this paradigm, head-restrained
monkeys manually manipulated a steering wheel to control the initiation
of the movement as well as the rotational velocity of the turntable on
which they were seated. The goal of the monkey was to align a chair
mounted target with a moving laser target.
Finally, the influences of dynamic and static neck proprioceptive
inputs on neural discharges were investigated. Two different paradigms
were used to dynamically activate the neck afferents. First,
the experimenter manually rotated the monkey's head to induce rapid
motion of the head relative to a stationary body. Second, the monkey's
head was held stationary relative to the earth while its body was
passively rotated at 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 Hz at 20°/s peak
velocity and 0.2, 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 Hz at 40°/s peak velocity. The
gain of the cervicoocular reflex induced during the rotations was
calculated as the resultant desaccaded eye velocity divided by the
turntable velocity. To test for the influence of static neck
afferent activation, the monkey's body was held at different static
positions relative to its earth-stationary head, and the mean firing
rate was calculated. During this testing, the torque produced by the
monkey against the head-restraint was measured using a reaction torque
transducer (Sensotec).
Analysis of neuron discharges
Before analysis, recorded gaze and head-position signals were
digitally filtered at 125 Hz. Eye position was calculated from the
difference between gaze and head-position signals. Gaze, eye, and
head-position signals were digitally differentiated to produce velocity
signals. The neural discharge was represented using a spike density
function in which a Gaussian function was convolved with the spike
train (SD of 5 ms for saccades and gaze shifts and 10 ms for remainder
of the paradigms) (Cullen et al. 1996
). Saccade and gaze
shift onsets and offsets were defined using a ±20°/s gaze velocity
criterion. Subsequent analysis was performed using custom algorithms
(Matlab, Mathworks).
To quantify a neuron's response to eye movement, we analyzed periods
of steady fixation to obtain a resting discharge (bias, sp/s) and an
eye-position sensitivity [kx,
(sp/s)/°] and periods of saccade-free smooth pursuit to obtain a
resting discharge (bias, sp/s), an eye-position sensitivity
[ksp, (sp/s)/°], and an
eye-velocity sensitivity [rsp,
(sp/s)/(°/s)] using a multiple regression analysis (Roy and
Cullen 1998
). Spike trains were assessed to determine whether
neurons paused or burst during saccades. In cases where neurons did
burst, the resting discharge (bias, sp/s), eye position [ksac, (sp/s)/°] and eye velocity
[rsac, (sp/s)/(°/s)] sensitivities were also estimated during saccades.
A least-squared regression analysis was then used to determine each
neuron's phase shift relative to head velocity, resting discharge
(bias, sp/s), and head velocity
[gpWBR (sp/s)/°/s] during pWBR and
pWBRc. Only unit data from periods of slow-phase vestibular nystagmus
during pWBR or steady fixation during pWBRc that occurred between quick
phases of vestibular nystagmus and/or saccades were included in the
analysis. A least-squared regression analysis was applied to neuronal
discharges during active head-on-body motion, active head and body
motion (driving paradigm), combined passive and active head motion,
passive head-on-body rotations, and passive body-under-head rotations.
The models utilized for each condition are described in
RESULTS. To quantify the ability of the linear regression
analysis to model neuronal discharges, the variance-accounted-for (VAF)
provided by each regression equation was determined. The VAF was
computed as {1 - [var(est
fr)/var(fr)]}, where est represents
the modeled firing rate (i.e., regression equation estimate) and fr
represents the actual firing rate. Note that only data for which the
firing rate was greater than zero were included in the optimization.
Statistical significance was determined using paired Student's
t-tests.
 |
RESULTS |
The firing behaviors of two distinct classes of vestibular nuclei
neurons are presented in the following text. First, we describe the
responses of type I PVP neurons during a sequence of paradigms in which
the gaze goal was systematically varied and the head movements were
externally applied and/or self-generated. We then describe the
responses of type II PVP neurons whose head and eye-velocity sensitivities in the head-restrained condition were opposite to those
of type I PVP neurons, during each of the same conditions.
Type I PVP neurons
HEAD-RESTRAINED CHARACTERIZATION.
The type I PVP neuron illustrated in Fig.
1 is typical of our
sample (n = 24) in that its firing rate increased for
contralaterally directed eye positions during spontaneous eye movements
(Fig. 1A, see inset), and its firing rate phase
lagged contralaterally directed eye velocity and led contralaterally
directed eye position during smooth pursuit (Fig. 1B).
During pWBR (Fig. 1C) the neuron increased its firing rate
in response to ipsilateral head motion (i.e., a type I response). In
addition, each type I PVP neuron stopped firing or "paused" during
ipsilaterally directed saccades and vestibular nystagmus quick phases
(vertical arrows in Fig. 1, A and C). Thus the
type I PVP neurons in our sample were comparable to those that have
been described in previous reports (Cullen and McCrea
1993
; Fuchs and Kimm 1975
; Keller and
Daniels 1975
; Keller and Kamath 1975
; Roy
and Cullen 1998
; Scudder and Fuchs 1992
). We
also utilized a second pWBR paradigm in which the monkey cancelled its
VOR by fixating a head-centered visual target that moved with the
vestibular turntable (pWBRc; Fig. 1D). This VOR cancellation
paradigm has been used extensively to dissociate a neuron's vestibular
sensitivity from its eye-movement related modulation. As can be seen in
Fig. 1D, type I PVP neurons remained well modulated in
response to ipsilateral head velocity during this paradigm.

View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Activity of an example type I position-vestibular-pause (PVP) neuron
(unit b39_1) during the head-restrained
condition. A: the neuron increased its discharge for
contralaterally directed eye movements and paused for ipsilaterally
directed saccades (vertical arrows). Inset: mean
neuronal firing rate was well correlated with horizontal eye position
during periods of steady fixation. B: the neuron also
increased its discharge during contralaterally directed smooth pursuit.
A model based on the bias discharge, the eye-position sensitivity, and
the eye-velocity sensitivity of the neuron provided a good fit to the
neural activity (smooth pursuit model, thick trace). C:
passive whole-body rotation (pWBR) was used to characterize the
neuron's response to head movements during VOR in the dark. A model
based on the bias discharge, the eye-position sensitivity, and the
head-velocity sensitivity during the compensatory eye movements made
during pWBR (solid trace) is superimposed on a model fit that also
included a head-acceleration term (gray shaded trace). The vertical
arrows indicate pauses in activity for ipsilaterally directed
vestibular quick phases. D: unit
b39_1 was typical in that its modulation was less
during pWBR while the monkey cancelled its VOR (pWBRc) by fixating a
target that moved with the table (pWBRc estimate, thin trace) than
during pWBR (pWBR model, thick trace). Traces directed upward are in
the ipsilateral direction. E, eye position; H, head position; ,
eye-in-head velocity; , head-in-space velocity; , gaze
velocity (= + ); FR, firing rate.
|
|
The eye- and head-movement sensitivities of type I PVP neurons were
quantified during fixation, smooth pursuit, and pWBR (see METHODS for details) using an analysis approach similar to
that employed in previous studies (e.g., Cullen and McCrea
1993
; Scudder and Fuchs 1992
; Tomlinson
and Robinson 1984
). First, mean eye positions and firing rates
were calculated during periods of steady fixation. A regression
analysis (Fig. 1A, inset) was done to determine each neuron's eye-position sensitivity (slope = kx) and resting discharge rate
(y intercept = biasx). The firing
rate of type I PVP neurons was generally well correlated with eye
position during ocular fixation (sample mean
R2 = 0.63 ± 0.04). The neuron
illustrated in Fig. 1 had a kx of 1.9 (sp/s)/° [sample mean = 1.38 ± 0.14 (sp/s)/°] and a
biasx of 116 sp/s (sample mean = 93 ± 11 sp/s). Second, we determined each neuron's eye-position sensitivity
(ksp), eye-velocity sensitivity (rsp), and bias discharge
(biassp) during 0.5-Hz smooth pursuit using the
following model
where fr is the firing rate. In general, type I PVP neuron
discharges during smooth pursuit were well described by the linear combination of eye velocity, eye position, and bias terms in this model
(sample mean VAF = 0.68 ± 0.05; Fig. 1B, smooth
pursuit model, thick trace). During this paradigm, the example neuron had a ksp of 1.6 (sp/s)/° [sample
mean = 1.21 ± 0.14 (sp/s)/°], a
rsp of 0.7 (sp/s)/(°/s) [sample
mean = 0.39 ± 0.08 (sp/s)/(°/s)], and a
biassp of 121 sp/s (sample mean = 89 ± 12 sp/s). The mean phase lag with respect to eye velocity for the
sample of neurons was 73 ± 2.1°. Third, we determined each
neuron's bias discharge (biaspWBR), sensitivity
to eye position (kpWBR), sensitivity
to head velocity (gpWBR), and
sensitivity to head acceleration
(apWBR) during the compensatory eye
movements made during pWBR using the following model
The model fit to the example neuron is illustrated in Fig.
1C (gray shaded trace). The estimated head acceleration term
was relatively small [0.07 ± 0.02 (sp/s)/(°/s2)], indicating that neuronal
modulation only slightly led head velocity (mean: 10 ± 0.75° at
0.5 Hz). As a result, removing this term from the model had little
effect on our ability to fit neuronal activity. For example, during
pWBR, model formulations with and without a head-acceleration term
provided similar fits of neuronal modulation (mean VAF for our sample
of neurons = 0.75 ± 0.04 vs. 0.71 ± 0.04, respectively). Furthermore, removing head acceleration from the model
formulation had no significant effect on our estimates of bias, eye
position, and head-velocity coefficient estimates (paired
t-test: P > 0.1). Because similar results
were found in our preliminary analysis of neuronal discharges during
the other behavioral tasks used in this study (e.g., pWBRc, passive
head-on-body rotation, and gaze shifts; see METHODS), we
simplified our model to the following form
The pWBR model fit to the example neuron is illustrated in
Fig. 1C (solid trace) and superimposed on the model fit
that included the head-acceleration term. This neuron had a
biaspWBR of 116 sp/s (sample mean = 98 ± 13), a kpWBR of 1.23 (sp/s)/°
[sample mean = 1.32 ± 0.14 (sp/s)/°], and a
gpWBR of 1.45 (sp/s)/(°/s) [sample
mean = 1.25 ± 0.15 (sp/s)/(°/s)]. The eye-position
sensitivities and bias values estimated by this model were comparable
to those obtained during fixation, smooth pursuit, and pWBR (for both
parameters paired t-tests were computed across all
combinations of paradigms and none indicated a significant difference;
P > 0.5).
Note that because gaze is stable during pWBR, eye- and head-motion
trajectories are equal and opposite. Thus it is not possible to use a
regression model that includes both eye- and head-velocity terms.
Furthermore, it is largely a matter of semantics whether PVP neurons
encode "head" or "eye" velocity during gaze stabilization. Because PVP neurons are the primary interneurons of the VOR, they function to produce a compensatory eye movement in response to head
motion. It then follows that during gaze stabilization, PVP neuron
modulation is at the same time both a response to the vestibular stimuli and a motor command signal to drive the VOR. Because in the
present study we asked what head-velocity signals are
carried by PVP neurons to the extraocular motoneurons, a model
formulation containing a head-velocity term, rather than eye-velocity
term was used.
To characterize the head-velocity-related modulation of type I PVP
neurons when the animals cancelled their VOR (pWBRc paradigm), we first
determined whether each neuron's activity could be predicted by its
behavior during pWBR. We found that the "pWBR model" consistently over-predicted the firing rate (Fig. 1D; pWBR model, thick
trace). We next estimated the head-velocity sensitivity
(gest) during this paradigm by using
the model
where biaspWBR and
kpWBR values were taken from the pWBR
model, and the value of gest was
optimized. The activity of each neuron was well described by this model
(mean sample VAF = 0.69 ± 0.03). The example neuron was
representative in that its estimated head-velocity sensitivity during
pWBRc was reduced by ~25% as compared with pWBR
[gest = 0.94 (sp/s)/(°/s); sample mean
gest = 0.94 ± 0.07 (sp/s)/(°/s); pWBRc estimate, thin trace]. This finding is
consistent with prior studies (Cullen and McCrea 1993
; McCrea et al. 1987
; Roy and Cullen 1998
).
To facilitate comparison across experimental paradigms, a given
neuron's head-velocity sensitivity during each task was normalized
relative to its sensitivity during pWBR (normalized sensitivity = [gest for a given
task/gpWBR]). Thus during pWBRc the
normalized head-velocity sensitivity of type I PVP neurons was
[0.94/1.25] = 0.75 (sp/s)/(°/s), corresponding to an attenuation of
~25% (P < 0.02).
VOLUNTARY HEAD-ON-BODY MOTION.
Rapid gaze redirection.
After the head-restrained characterization had been completed, the
monkey's head was slowly released to allow a wide range of motion in
all three axes (yaw, pitch, and roll). Unit activity was carefully
monitored during the transition from the head-restrained to
head-unrestrained condition to ensure that neurons remained isolated
and undamaged.
The firing rate of each type I PVP neuron was then recorded during
voluntary combined eye-head gaze shifts. For analysis, ipsilaterally
directed gaze shifts (i.e., gaze shifts for which the head motion was
in the neuron's "on direction") were sorted by amplitude into five
separate data sets, each spanning 10° and ranging from 15 to 65°.
In agreement with what we have previously shown (Roy and Cullen
1998
), the pWBR model consistently over-predicted the discharge
of type I PVP neurons during small as well as large gaze shifts (Fig.
2A, pWBR model, 2nd
row from bottom, thick trace). To estimate the
head-velocity signal carried by type I PVP neurons during gaze shifts
we first used Estimate 1. Consistent with the findings
of our previous report (Roy and Cullen 1998
), the
head-velocity sensitivity estimated was significantly reduced relative
to that observed during pWBR. However, Estimate 1
provided an extremely poor fit of neuronal firing rates (Fig.
2A, Estimate 1, 2nd row from
bottom, thin trace; mean VAF =
0.97 ± 0.47). We
have previously argued that the addition of an eye-velocity term to the
model would dramatically improve our ability to describe type I PVP neuron activity during gaze shifts (Roy and Cullen
1998
). To specifically test this proposal, neuronal discharges
were fit using the following model
in which eye- and head-velocity sensitivities
(rest and
gest, respectively) were estimated
(Fig. 2A, Estimate 2, bottom row, thick trace). Recall that only data for which the firing rate was
greater than zero were included in the model optimization (see
METHODS). Furthermore because negative firing rates are
physiologically meaningless, the model was plotted only when firing
rate values were greater than zero.

View larger version (51K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Activity of example type I PVP neurons (units
b39_1 and cr81_1)
during and after voluntary ipsilaterally directed combined eye-head
gaze shifts. A: the pWBR model overpredicted the
discharge of this neuron during small- and large-amplitude gaze shifts
(pWBR model, thick trace, 2nd row from bottom).
Estimate 1 provided a poor fit to the firing rate during
gaze shifts (Estimate 1, thin trace, 2nd row from
bottom). Estimate 2, with its additional
eye-velocity term, provided a much improved fit to the neural activity
(Estimate 2, thick trace, bottom row).
Dotted vertical lines indicate the onset and offset of gaze shifts
using a ±20°/s criterion. Open arrows indicate the post-gaze-shift
intervals. B: during gaze shifts, the head-velocity
sensitivity of our sample of type I PVP neurons, obtained using
Estimate 2, decreased significantly as gaze shift
amplitude increased from 15 to 65° (open columns), and for all gaze
shift amplitudes, responses were significantly smaller than those
resulting from pWBR (solid column). C: in contrast,
head-velocity sensitivities in the post-gaze-shift interval (denoted by
open arrows in A; gray shaded columns) were comparable
to those measured during pWBR (solid column). Error bars show SE.
Asterisks, P < 0.05. G, gaze position.
|
|
As predicted, Estimate 2 provided a better fit of neuronal
firing rates (mean VAF = 0.54 ± 0.06) than did
Estimate 1 during gaze shifts. On a neuron-by-neuron basis,
the head-velocity sensitivities obtained using Estimate 2 were well correlated with those that had been obtained using
Estimate 1 for each gaze shift amplitude range (e.g., for
gaze shifts of 55-65°; slope = 0.81;
R2 = 0.66). The relationship between a
neuron's head-velocity sensitivity during gaze shifts
(using Estimate 2) and gaze-shift amplitude is shown in the
histogram of Fig. 2B. As gaze-shift amplitude increased,
type I PVP neuron responses to head velocity diminished significantly
[e.g., mean normalized gest = 0.67 ± 0.13 (sp/s)/(°/s) for 15-25° vs. 0.25 ± 0.12 (sp/s)/(°/s) for 55-65°; P < 0.05] and the
attenuation was always significant relative to pWBR (P < 0.05).
We carried out a comparable analysis to estimate the head-velocity
signal carried by type I PVP neurons during the interval 10-80 ms
immediately following gaze shifts (Fig. 2A,
denoted by open arrows) where gaze was stable but the head was still
moving. The pWBR model provided a good fit to the firing rate of type I
PVP neurons (Fig. 2A, pWBR model, thick trace, top firing
rate). Accordingly during the post-gaze shift interval, the
head-velocity sensitivities obtained using Estimate 1 were
not significantly different from those estimated during pWBR for all
gaze shift amplitudes (Fig. 2C; P > 0.4).
Therefore the model fits of the pWBR and Estimate 1 overlap
during this interval (Fig. 2A, thick trace, top firing
rate). Note that during this interval, eye- and head-motion
trajectories are equal (and opposite), and as a result (as during pWBR,
see above) Estimates 2 and 1 are virtually equivalent. Thus here and for each of the behavioral paradigms described in the following text, Estimate 1 was used
whenever gaze was stable in space (i.e., when eye velocity =
head velocity) and Estimate 2 was used whenever gaze
velocity
0.
Type I PVP neuron activity was also characterized during
contralaterally directed gaze shifts (i.e., off direction of the neuron's head-velocity sensitivity). The majority of neurons (96%) did not pause during contralaterally directed head-restrained saccades
of all amplitudes (Fig. 3A).
The same neurons also did not pause or burst for small contralaterally
directed gaze shifts <35° (Fig. 3B, left). As
shown in Fig. 3B (left), the pWBR model superimposed well on the neuronal discharges for small gaze shifts. However, for larger-amplitude gaze shifts, the pWBR model described the
activity only until the neuronal discharges were driven to inhibition
as a result of the head velocity becoming sufficiently large (Fig.
3B, right). Accordingly, we found that whether a
neuron's firing rate was driven to zero during a gaze shift depended
on the balance between the bias and the head-velocity sensitivity of
the individual neuron. In general, head velocities were large enough to
drive the firing rate to zero for gaze shifts >35° in amplitude.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Activity of an example type I PVP neuron (unit
b39_1) during voluntary contralaterally directed
head-restrained saccades and combined eye-head gaze shifts.
A: during small (left) and large
(right) saccades, the majority of type I PVP neurons did
not pause or burst in activity. B: during
small-amplitude gaze shifts (<35°, left), the pWBR
model (thick trace) provided a good prediction of neural discharge.
Similarly, during large-amplitude gaze shifts (right),
the model provided a good fit until the discharge was driven to 0 by
the faster head velocities.
|
|
Gaze pursuit.
The behavioral goal during both pWBRc (Fig. 1D) and gaze
shifts (Fig. 2A) was different from that during the pWBR
(Fig. 1C); during pWBRc and gaze shifts, the animal's goal
was to redirect rather than stabilize its gaze-in-space. We found that
during pWBRc and gaze shifts the head-velocity signals carried by the direct VOR pathways (i.e., type I PVP neurons) were reduced. This reduction in the head-velocity sensitivity of the direct VOR pathways is consistent with the behavioral goal of the animal because the VOR
functions to generate an eye movement in the opposite direction to that
of the intended change in gaze. We next tested whether the discharge
activity of type I PVP neurons was significantly attenuated in a third
gaze-redirection task in which the monkey made voluntary combined
eye-head movements to pursue a moving target (i.e., gaze pursuit). The
example neuron shown in Fig. 4A was representative of our
sample of type I PVP neurons in that the pWBR model provided a poor
prediction of the discharge activity (pWBR model, thin trace; VAF = 0.21 ± 0.21). Estimate 2 provided a good fit of each
neuron's modulation (Fig. 4A, Estimate 2,
bottom row, thick trace; sample VAF = 0.64 ± 0.03). For the neurons tested (n = 19), the
head-velocity sensitivity was significantly less than that measured
during pWBR [mean normalized gest = 0.54 ± 0.08 (sp/s)/(°/s); P < 0.05].
Interestingly, on a neuron-by-neuron basis, the eye-velocity
sensitivity obtained with Estimate 2 during gaze pursuit was
comparable to that obtained during smooth pursuit (Fig. 4B;
R2 = 0.67).

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Responses of a typical type I PVP neuron (unit
b39_1) to voluntary head-on-body motion during
combined eye-head gaze pursuit. A: the neuron's
response to self-generated head motion was overpredicted by the
neuron's sensitivity during pWBR (pWBR model, thick trace, 2nd
row from bottom). Estimate 2 provided a good of
the firing rate (Estimate 2, thick trace, bottom
row) and the estimated head-velocity sensitivity was
significantly reduced as compared with pWBR. B: on a
neuron-by-neuron basis, the eye-velocity sensitivities estimated during
gaze pursuit were similar to those estimated during smooth pursuit.
Dotted line represents unity (slope = 1). : target
velocity.
|
|
In summary, the head-velocity related modulation of type I PVP neurons
was significantly reduced when the monkey redirected its gaze. This was
true for the head rotations that were passively applied to
the monkey during pWBRc as well as for the actively generated head-on-body rotations that were made by the monkey during
ipsilaterally directed gaze shifts and gaze pursuit.
Do type I PVP neurons differentially encode head velocity during
self-generated vs. passively applied rotations of the head-in-space?
Both gaze shifts and gaze pursuit involve the voluntary movement
of the head on the body. To determine whether type I PVP neurons might
differentially encode head-velocity during self-generated versus
passively applied rotations of the head-in-space, we used a paradigm in
which head-restrained monkeys voluntarily drove or controlled the
direction and rotation velocity of the turntable, thus moving both
their heads and bodies together in space. The monkeys were trained to
align a turntable mounted laser target (Ttable) with a computer controlled
target (Tgoal; Fig.
5A, see schema), which either
stepped from one location to another or moved sinusoidally. The data
traces shown in Fig. 5A illustrate the discharge activity of
an example type I PVP neuron during the two behavioral tasks. When the
monkey redirected its gaze ipsilaterally to align the turntable with a
target that stepped (Fig. 5A; middle,
), the
pWBR model over-predicted the discharge of the neuron (pWBR model,
thick trace). Indeed, for the neurons tested (n = 8),
the estimated head-velocity sensitivity was significantly attenuated
relative to pWBR to a level comparable to that observed during gaze
shifts [Estimate 2 mean normalized
gest = 0.18 ± 0.21 (sp/s)/(°/s);
Fig. 5B,
]. Similarly, when the monkey pursued the
target (Fig. 5A; right), the pWBR model
overpredicted the discharge of the neuron (pWBR model, thick trace),
and the estimated head-velocity sensitivity was significantly reduced
relative to pWBR [Estimate 2 mean normalized
gest = 0.64 ± 0.04 (sp/s)/(°/s); Fig. 5B,
]. This attenuation was
comparable to that described for gaze pursuit and pWBRc above
(P > 0.7 and > 0.27, respectively).

View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Type I PVP neuron responses to voluntary combined head-body motion.
A: head-restrained monkeys manually controlled a
steering wheel to rotate the vestibular turntable relative to space
(schema). Their goal was to align a turntable-fixed laser target
(Ttable; schema) with a computer-controlled
target (Tgoal; schema) that either stepped
in location (middle) or moved sinusoidally (right
panel). This example neuron (unit br23_1)
was typical in that its response was well predicted by its sensitivity
to head velocity during pWBR whenever the monkey stabilized gaze (pWBR
model, thick trace). The neuron paused in activity for rapid
ipsilaterally directed eye-head/body gaze redirections ( ) and was
less responsive to head motion when the target was pursued with both
its eyes and head/body as compared with pWBR (right).
B: type I PVP neurons had a greater attenuation during
rapid gaze redirection ( ) than during slow gaze
redirection ( ) and were not attenuated when gaze was
stabilized ( ) as compared with pWBR
( ).
|
|
In contrast, in the intervals where the monkey had acquired the new
target, but the turntable was still moving (i.e., gaze was stable) the
pWBR model provided a good fit to the firing rate (Fig. 5A,
middle, pWBR model, thick trace; mean VAF = 0.64 ± 0.07) and accordingly the estimated head-velocity sensitivity was
not significantly different from that during pWBR [mean normalized gest = 0.92 ± 0.05 (sp/s)/(°/s); Fig. 5B, compare
and
]. This result
is analogous to that described in the preceding text for the
active head-on-body motion made when gaze is immobile
immediately following gaze shifts. Thus the head-velocity information
carried by type I PVP neurons was the same regardless of whether the
head was voluntarily moved on the body or whether the head and body were voluntarily moved together; head-velocity sensitivities were similarly reduced when the monkey redirected its gaze and were unaltered when the monkey stabilized its gaze. Taken together, these
findings support the hypothesis that type I PVP neuron responses to
head motion vary in a manner that depends exclusively on the monkey's
current gaze goal.
Type I PVP neurons
SIMULTANEOUS VOLUNTARY AND PASSIVE MOTION.
In the behavioral tasks presented until this point, the head motion has
been either passively imposed or self-generated, yet, under natural
circumstances, passive perturbations of the head and/or body can occur
at the same time as voluntary head motion. To further test the proposal
that the head-velocity information carried by type I PVP neuron
modulation depends only on current gaze goal, we characterized neuronal
discharges during simultaneous passive and self-generated head motion.
Head-unrestrained monkeys were encouraged to generate voluntary
head-on-body movements (Fig. 6A, dashed line arrow in
schema) while being passively whole-body rotated (Fig. 6A,
solid arrow in schema). During this paradigm, the head-in-space motion
is the sum of the passive turntable rotation and the active
head-on-body motion.

View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Type I PVP neuron responses to combined voluntary and passive
head-in-space motion. A:
head-unrestrained monkeys generated voluntary
head-on-body movements (dashed arrow in schema) while being
passively rotated by the vestibular turntable (thick arrow in
schema). Head-in-space velocity ( -in-space) is the sum of
the passive rotation velocity (chair rotation) and voluntary
head-on-body velocity ( -on-body). The modulation of the example
neuron (unit c131_1) was well correlated
with the head-in-space motion ( -in-space model, thick trace)
whenever the monkey stabilized its gaze but was poorly related whenever
the monkey rapidly redirected (vertical arrows) or slowly redirected
its gaze (middle). B: the responses to
both the passive and the voluntary components of head-in-space motion
were significantly attenuated when the monkey either rapidly redirected
(open columns) or slowly redirected (vertically striped columns) its
gaze as compared with pWBR (solid column). In contrast, the neurons
showed no attenuation during gaze stabilization (gray shaded
columns).
|
|
We characterized type I PVP neuron discharge activity with respect to
both the passively applied and actively generated components of the
head-in-space motion during gaze redirection using the following model
|
|
in which the eye-velocity sensitivity
(rest) and the sensitivities to the
passive and active components of the head-in-space velocity
(passest, and actest
respectively) were estimated. Note that during gaze stabilization, the
eye-velocity sensitivity (rest) was
not estimated (as during pWBR, see preceding text) because eye- and
head-motion trajectories were equal (and opposite). For all neurons
tested (n = 12), responses differed significantly during gaze redirection versus gaze stabilization (P < 0.02). During rapid gaze redirection (gaze shifts; Fig. 6A,
denoted by vertical arrows), the responses of type I PVP neurons to
both the passive and the active components of head-in-space motion were
significantly attenuated as compared with pWBR (Fig. 6B; compare open columns to the solid column). During slow gaze redirection (Fig. 6A, region labeled slow gaze redirection), type I PVP
neuron responses to the passive and active components of head-in-space motion were also significantly attenuated (Fig. 6B, compare
vertically striped columns to the solid column) though this attenuation
was less than that seen during rapid gaze redirection. Finally, when the monkey stabilized its gaze relative to space (Fig. 6A,
regions labeled gaze stabilization), neuronal discharges were
underpredicted by a model based on the passive component of head motion
and the neuron's sensitivities during pWBR (Fig. 6A, pWBR
model, thin trace; mean VAF = 0.44 ± 0.13) but were well
predicted by a model based on the head-in-space motion and the same
pWBR parameters (Fig. 6A,
-in-space model, thick
trace; mean VAF = 0.73 ± 0.06). Consistent with the latter
model prediction, the head-velocity sensitivities to both passive and
active components of head-in-space motion obtained using Estimate
3 were comparable to the head-velocity sensitivity during pWBR
(Fig. 6B, compare gray shaded columns to solid column). In
summary, neuronal sensitivities to the passive and active components of
head motion were comparable during rapid gaze redirection
(P > 0.2), during slow gaze redirection
(P > 0.2), and during gaze stabilization
(P > 0.3). These results further support the
hypothesis that type I PVP neuron head-velocity responses do not
dependent on whether head motion was actively or passively generated but rather depend on the current behavioral goal of the monkey.
INFLUENCE OF PASSIVE NECK PROPRIOCEPTOR ACTIVATION.
To determine whether afferent inputs from neck muscle proprioceptors
influence the activity of type I PVP neurons, we used two different
paradigms. First we passively rotated the monkey's body while its head
was held earth-stationary (Fig.
7A, see schema). The torque
produced by the monkey against the head restraint was concurrently
measured and found to be small (less than ±0.5 Nm) compared with that
produced when orienting to food target (more than ±3.5 Nm). Thus
during these passive rotations, the neck motor efference signals
generated by the monkeys were minimal, yet the musculature was
stretched such that neck proprioceptors were activated. The neuron
shown in Fig. 7A was typical in that its activity was not
significantly affected by the passive rotation of the neck. Its firing
rate was well predicted by the pWBR model (note, in this case: head
velocity = 0; pWBR model, thick trace). This finding is best
appreciated when the firing rate is corrected for the neuron's
eye-position sensitivity (Fig. 7A;
FRcorr). For all neurons tested
(n = 12), the neck-related signals were negligible
[mean neck-velocity sensitivity = 0.07 ± 0.05 (sp/s)/(°/s)].

View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Response of type I PVP neurons to passive neck rotation.
A: the response of example neuron (unit
gr11_2) was typical in that it was not modulated
by neck-related signals when the monkey's body was passively rotated
beneath its stationary head. The neural discharge was well described by
the pWBR model (thick trace, 2nd row from bottom). This
is emphasized when the firing rate and pWBR model are corrected for the
neuron's eye-position sensitivity: FRcorr = FR - (kpWBR * E) and pWBR
modelcorr = pWBR model (kpWBR * E). B
and C: during this task, the status of the cervicoocular
reflex was simultaneously assessed by calculating the resulting gain
(eye velocity/neck velocity). The gains of the monkeys tested are shown
by the gray traces (triangle, monkey C; square,
monkey G; diamond, monkey J) and were not
significantly different from 0 over the range of frequencies and
velocities (20°/s, B; 40°/s, C)
tested. The average gain of the 3 monkeys is indicated by the solid
black trace. The mean ± SE VOR gain (eye velocity/head velocity)
is plotted for comparison (0.94 ± 0.06; see text).
s, head-in-space velocity; s,
body-in-space velocity; Torque: reaction torque produced by the monkey
against the head-restraint.
|
|
Because eye movements were simultaneously recorded during this task, we
also were able to assess the status of the cervicoocular reflex (COR).
The gain of the COR (gain = eye velocity/neck velocity) was not
significantly different from zero over the range of frequencies and
velocities tested (Fig. 7, B and C for 20 and
40°/s, respectively). The mean VOR gain (gain = eye
velocity/
head velocity) of the monkeys is shown in the same figure
for comparison (0.9 ± 0.06; Fig. 7, B and
C). VOR gain was measured at 0.5 Hz and assumed to be
constant over the range of frequencies used in this study (see for
example: Bohmer and Henn 1983
; Keller
1978
; Paige 1983
; Telford et al.
1996
). Prior studies have reported comparable COR gains in
humans and rhesus monkeys. We consider the implication of this result
in the DISCUSSION.
To further investigate whether afferent inputs from neck muscle
proprioceptors affect type I PVP neuron discharge activity, the
monkey's head was passively rotated on its stationary body to elicit
comparable head velocities and trajectories to those observed during
natural head motion (Fig. 8A,
see schema). The example neuron illustrated in Fig. 8A was
typical in that when gaze was stable, the pWBR model provided a good
prediction of its activity during the head trajectories generated
during this paradigm (pWBR model, thin trace; mean VAF = 0.56 ± 0.04). The head-velocity sensitivities of the neurons tested
(n = 12) were found to be comparable to pWBR
values during gaze stabilization [mean normalized
gest = 0.99 ± 0.04 (sp/s)/(°/s); Fig. 8B,
]. However, neuron responses to
head velocity were significantly attenuated when the monkey rapidly
redirected its gaze during the passive head rotations [see
in Fig.
8A; mean normalized gest = 0.21 ± 0.18 (sp/s)/(°/s); Fig. 8B,
].

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Response of type I PVP neurons to passive rotation of the head-on-body.
A: the experimenter (hand in schema) passively rotated
the monkey's head relative to its earth stationary body. The discharge
of example neuron (unit gr11_2) was
reliably predicted by the pWBR model whenever the monkey stabilized its
gaze (thin trace). In contrast, the neuron paused in activity whenever
the monkey rapidly redirected its gaze ( ). B: neuron
responses during passive head-on-body rotation were comparable to those
during pWBR when gaze was stable ( ) and significantly
attenuated when gaze was rapidly redirected ( ) as
compared with pWBR ( ).
|
|
The results illustrated in Figs. 7 and 8 demonstrate that the
dynamic activation of the neck proprioceptors had no
influence on the activity of type I PVP neurons. To test whether type I PVP neurons might carry static neck position signals, we
again passively rotated the monkey's body under its earth-fixed head (as in Fig. 7), but this time held the body of the monkey immobile at
different positions. The pWBR model (where head velocity = 0)
provided an accurate fit to the discharge activity (Fig.
9, pWBR model, thick trace) during this
paradigm. The mean static neck-position sensitivity of the neuron
illustrated in Fig. 9 was not significantly different from zero
(P > 0.4), which was representative of all neurons
tested (n = 11). This result can be clearly observed
once the firing rate has been corrected for the neuron's eye-position
sensitivity (Fig. 9; FRcorr and
inset). Thus we conclude that type I PVP neurons in the
alert rhesus monkey are not influenced by either the dynamic
or static activation of neck proprioceptors.

View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9.
Response of type I PVP neurons to static body positions. The pWBR model
accurately predicted the discharge activity of the example neuron
(unit gr11_2) during stable gaze and body
positions (thick trace, 2nd row from bottom). This is
emphasized when the firing rate and pWBR model (bottom)
are corrected for the eye-position sensitivity of the neuron (see Fig.
7 legend). Inset: the mean corrected firing rate was not
correlated to static body position. Body: body position in space.
|
|
SUMMARY OF NEURAL DISCHARGE DURING PASSIVE AND
VOLUNTARY HEAD MOTION.
Type I PVP neurons responses to both passive and self-generated head
motion were influenced by the gaze goal of the monkey. When the monkey
stabilized its gaze, the head-velocity sensitivity of the neurons was
comparable to that obtained during pWBR (Fig. 10;
). In contrast, when the monkey
redirected its axis of gaze either slowly (Fig. 10;
) or rapidly
(Fig. 10;
), the head-velocity sensitivity of the neurons was
significantly attenuated as compared with pWBR. The neuronal responses
were more attenuated during rapid gaze redirection than during slow
gaze redirection (Fig. 10; compare
and
). Whether the head was
passively or actively moved or whether the head moved relative to the
body or not did not affect the neural discharges once the gaze goal was
taken into account.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 10.
Summary of type I PVP neuron discharge activity during passive and
voluntary head motion. When the monkey redirected its axis of gaze
either slowly ( ) or rapidly ( ), the
head-velocity sensitivity of the neurons was significantly attenuated
as compared with pWBR (*, P < 0.05 relative to
pWBR). The neuronal responses were significantly less during
ipsilaterally directed rapid gaze redirection than during slow gaze
redirection ( , P < 0.05 relative
to slow gaze redirection). In contrast, when the monkey stabilized its
gaze, the head-velocity sensitivity of the neurons was comparable to
that obtained during pWBR ( ).- - -, the average
normalized head-velocity sensitivities across conditions with the same
gaze goal.
|
|
Type II PVP neurons
In the present study, we also characterized type II PVP neurons.
These neurons have opposite eye- and head-motion sensitivities to type
I PVP neurons during the head-restrained paradigms shown in Fig. 1 and
were included in the present report because they behaved very much like
type I PVP neurons during each of the paradigms tested in our study.
The only significant difference in firing behavior that we observed was
that these neurons frequently discharged a burst during ipsilaterally
directed saccades, vestibular quick phases, and gaze shifts. This
difference is detailed in the following text.
The type II PVP neuron illustrated in Fig.
11 was typical of
the neurons tested (n = 14) in that its firing rate
increased for ipsilateral eye positions during spontaneous eye
movements (Fig. 11A, see inset). The firing rate
of type II PVP neurons was generally well correlated with eye position
during ocular fixation (sample mean R2 = 0.64 ± 0.06). The example neuron had a
kx of 1.31 (sp/s)/° [sample
mean = 1.67 ± 0.37 (sp/s)/°] and a bias of 50 sp/s
(sample mean = 55 ± 10 sp/s) during periods of fixation.
During smooth pursuit, type II PVP neuron firing rate phase lagged
ipsilateral eye velocity and led ipsilateral eye position (Fig.
11B). In general, neuron discharges were well described by
the linear combination of eye velocity, eye position, and bias terms
(sample mean VAF = 0.56 ± 0.09; Fig. 11B, smooth
pursuit model, thick trace). The example neuron had a
ksp of 0.61 (sp/s)/° [sample
mean = 1.52 ± 0.6 (sp/s)/°], a
rsp of 0.44 (sp/s)/(°/s) [sample
mean = 0.54 ± 0.14 (sp/s)/(°/s)], and a
biassp of 59 sp/s (sample mean = 64 ± 12 sp/s). The mean phase lag with respect to eye velocity for the
sample of neurons during smooth pursuit was 64 ± 4.5°. During passive whole-body rotation in the dark (pWBR, Fig. 11C),
the neuron increased its firing rate in response to contralateral head
motion (i.e., a type II response). A model based on a combination of head velocity, eye position, and bias terms (Estimate 1)
provided a good fit of type II PVP neuron activity during pWBR (sample mean VAF = 0.59 ± 0.06). The example neuron had a
biaspWBR of 67 sp/s (sample mean = 80 ± 10), a kpWBR of 0.65 (sp/s)/°
[sample mean = 1.25 ± 0.37 (sp/s)/°], and a
gpWBR of 1.71 (sp/s)/(°/s) [sample
mean = 0.89 ± 0.08 (sp/s)/(°/s); Fig. 11C, pWBR
model, thick trace]. In addition, each type II PVP neuron stopped
firing or "paused" during contralaterally directed saccades and
vestibular nystagmus quick phases (note vertical arrows in Fig. 11,
A and C). The head-velocity sensitivity of type
II PVP neurons was obtained during pWBRc using Estimate 1 (mean sample VAF = 0.50 ± 0.1). The example neuron was
representative in that its estimated head velocity was reduced by
~21% as compared with pWBR [normalized gest = 0.79 (sp/s)/(°/s); mean
normalized gest = 0.71 ± 0.06 (sp/s)/(°/s); Fig. 11D, pWBRc estimate, thin trace]. This
reduction was comparable to what we observed for type I PVP neurons.
However, while type II PVP neurons paused during vestibular nystagmus
quick phases and saccades in the "off direction" for eye motion
(see contralateral saccade in Fig.
12A, left), they
most often (n = 9/14) burst during saccades in the
"on direction" (ipsilateral saccade shown in Fig. 12A,
right). This latter behavior differed from that of type I PVP neurons. During ipsilaterally directed saccades, the eye-velocity sensitivity (rsac) of type II PVP
neurons was estimated [fr = biasx + (kx * eye position) + (rsac * eye velocity)] and found to be 0.27 ± 0.05 (sp/s)/(°/s).

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 11.
Activity of an example type II PVP neuron (unit
c66_1) during the head-restrained condition.
A: the neuron increased its discharge for ipsilaterally
directed eye movements and paused for contralaterally directed saccades
(vertical arrows). Inset: mean neuronal firing rate was
well correlated with horizontal eye position during periods of steady
fixation. B: the neuron also increased its discharge
during ipsilaterally directed smooth pursuit. A model based on the bias
discharge, the eye-position sensitivity, and the eye-velocity
sensitivity of the neuron provided a good fit to the neural activity
(smooth pursuit model, thick trace). C: passive
whole-body rotation was used to characterize the neuron's response to
head movements during VOR in the dark (pWBR). A model based on the bias
discharge, the eye-position sensitivity, and the head-velocity
sensitivity during the compensatory eye movements made during pWBR is
superimposed on the firing rate trace. The vertical arrows indicate
pauses in activity for contralaterally directed vestibular quick
phases. D: unit b39_1 was
typical in that its modulation was less during passive whole-body
rotation while the monkey cancelled its VOR (pWBRc) by fixating a
target that moved with the table (pWBRc estimate, thin trace) than
during pWBR (pWBR model, thick trace).
|
|

View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 12.
Activity of an example type II PVP neuron (unit
cr93_1) during saccades and eye-head gaze shifts.
A: this unit was typical in that it paused for
contralaterally directed saccades (left) and burst for
ipsilaterally directed saccades (right).
B: during contralaterally directed gaze shifts of all
amplitudes, the neuron paused in activity. C: the neuron
burst in activity during both large (left) and small
(right) ipsilaterally directed gaze shifts.
D: as with type I PVP neurons, the head-velocity
sensitivities of type II PVP neurons decreased as a function of
amplitude for ipsilaterally directed gaze shifts (compare
) and were always significantly reduced as compared
with pWBR ( ).
|
|
Similar to their responses during head-restrained saccades, most
(10/13) type II PVP neurons paused for the duration of eye-head gaze
shifts in the contralateral direction (Fig. 12B). In
addition, most (8/13) neurons burst for the duration of gaze shifts in
the ipsilateral direction (Fig. 12C). Recall that the
activity of type I PVP neurons was attenuated, in an
amplitude-dependent manner, during ipsilaterally directed gaze shifts.
We estimated the eye- and head-velocity sensitivity of each type II PVP
neuron during ipsilaterally directed gaze shifts using Estimate
2. Even though they burst, the head-velocity sensitivities of type
II PVP neurons were significantly reduced for gaze shifts of all
amplitudes (Fig. 12D; compare
and
). While the
attenuation was not as great as that observed for type I PVP neurons
(Fig. 2B), the level of attenuation did significantly
increase with the increasing amplitude
(R2 = 0.83). In addition, the
estimated eye-velocity sensitivities were comparable to those