| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
REPORT
1Departments of Neurology and 2Physiology and Biophysics, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York; and 3The Department of Computer and Information Science, Brooklyn College of the City University of New York, Brooklyn, New York, New York
Submitted 10 December 2004; accepted in final form 27 January 2005
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
25%. We assumed that gain changes over three-dimensional space could be described by a sinusoid the amplitude of which also varied sinusoidally. Using gain changes obtained from the head position in which the gains were adapted, a three-dimensional surface was generated that was qualitatively similar to a surface obtained from the experimental data. This extends previous findings on vertical aVOR gain adaptation in one plane and introduces a conceptual framework for understanding plasticity in three dimensions: aVOR gain changes are composed of two components, one of which depends on head position relative to gravity. It is likely that this gravitational dependence optimizes the stability of retinal images during movement in three-dimensional space. |
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
; Lisberger 1994; Miles and Eighmy 1980). Retinal image slip induced by magnifying or minifying goggles (Cohen et al. 1992), by reversing prisms (Gonshor and Melvill Jones 1973), or by rotation of the visual surround in phase or out-of-phase with the subject (Miles and Eighmy 1980) is an efficient method to modify the gain of the aVOR.
There is evidence that head position with regard to gravity is also an important context for adaptive aVOR gain changes (Baker et al. 1987a, b; Tan et al. 1992; Tiliket et al. 1993, 1994; Yakushin et al. 2000a). When the vertical aVOR was adapted in side-down positions in humans and monkeys, gain changes were maximal when the head was in the position of adaptation, i.e., with one side down, and declined as the subjects were reoriented toward the opposite side down position (Yakushin et al. 2003a–c). From this, we posited that the gain adaptation for the vertical aVOR was a superposition of two components: one gravity independent and another gravity dependent. It was not clear from the previous studies whether the gravity-dependent gain changes would apply to all components of the aVOR and whether this same organization would extend to three dimensions.
The aim of this study was to determine whether gravity dependence was inherent in adaptation of the horizontal aVOR, which generally does not interact with gravity when rotating the head about a yaw axis while upright. This would demonstrate that dependence of aVOR adaptation on gravity is a fundamental property of the aVOR and that this gravity dependence extends over every head position in three-dimensional space. It would further establish the principle that aVOR adaptation is composed of gravity-dependent and -independent components and broaden the conceptual base for studying aVOR plasticity. In the past, it has generally been assumed that aVOR gain changes only involved pathways between the semicircular canals and eye muscle motor nuclei. Demonstration that a gravity-dependent context is associated with adaptation of the gain of the aVOR in every head orientation would substantially expand the nature of the signals that are utilized in this process.
|
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
) and was approved by the Institution Animal Care and Use Committee. During experiments, monkeys sat with their head fixed in a primate chair in a multiaxis vestibular stimulator (Yakushin et al. 2000b, 2003c). Horizontal, vertical, and torsional eye movements were recorded with two scleral search coils (Robinson 1963). Because there were no consistent modulations in vertical and torsional eye movements, only the horizontal component was studied. Eye velocity was calibrated by rotation in light at a constant velocity of 30°/s, wherein slow phase velocity was assumed to be equal to stimulus velocity.
Horizontal aVOR gains were determined by oscillating the animals in darkness about their yaw axis at 0.5 Hz (60°/s peak velocity) before and after adaptation. The axis of rotation was either aligned with the spatial vertical or was tilted from it in 10° increments 
90° in four different planes: frontal (tilt about naso-occipital axis, Fig. 1D, inset), sagittal (tilt about interaural axis, F, inset), and the two intermediate planes, which lay around the axes of one anterior and contralateral posterior canals. One of these is shown in Fig. 1E, inset.
|
The animals were adapted in one of five head orientations in each experiment: upright, left side down (LSD), right side down (RSD), prone, or supine. The test frequency (0.5 Hz) was higher than the adaptation frequency (0.2 Hz) for technical reasons. Although it is possible that observed gain changes would be bigger at the frequency of adaptation (Lisberger et al. 1983), gravity-dependent components of the vertical aVOR gain changes were not significantly different when tested by sinusoidal rotations from 0.2 to 4 Hz after adaptation had been done with steps of velocity (Yakushin et al. 2003c). At least 1 wk was allowed for the aVOR gain to recover before the next experiment was performed.
Eye positions were sampled at 1 kHz with 16-bit resolution and digitally differentiated using a 25-point filter (Reisine and Raphan 1992). Saccadic eye velocities were identified and removed using a maximum likelihood ratio criterion (Singh et al. 1981). The remaining slow phase eye velocities were fit with sinusoids from which the amplitude of eye velocity before and after adaptation was determined. Gains were calculated as a ratio of the amplitudes of eye and head velocity. Gain changes in each tested head orientation were expressed as a percent of the preadapted gain values and plotted as a function of head orientation. Tilt angles forward, anterior (Fig. 1, C, E, F, H, and I), and RSD (D and G) were positive.
The gain changes from each test plane plotted as a function of head tilt were fit with a function, y = A* cos (x + B) + C and were interpreted as being composed of gravity-independent and -dependent components. The bias, C, was the gravity-independent gain change (Fig. 1D). The amplitude of the sinusoidal fit, A, represents the gravity-dependent gain change. The parameter, B, represents the spatial phase, i.e., the head orientation relative to gravity at which the gravity-dependent gain changes were maximal. To be consistent with our earlier studies (Yakushin et al. 2000a, 2003a–c), peak-to-peak values of gravity-dependent gain changes (2*A) were used for analysis. The significance of each component of the gain changes was evaluated using a t-test. Gain changes for each head position were plotted in three dimensions and expressed as a surface using a spline interpolation (Sandwell 1987).
|
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
For tilts in the frontal plane (90°/270°) that included the head orientation in which gain had been adapted, the peak-to-peak gain of the gravity-dependent component was 42% with a bias of 27% (Fig. 1D). When the animal was tilted in a sagittal plane (0°/180°; Fig. 1F, inset), orthogonal to the frontal plane, the peak-to-peak gravity-dependent component was only 4%, whereas the bias was 20% (Fig. 1F). For tilts in a plane intermediate between the two, e.g., 45°/225° (Fig. 1E, inset), the peak-to-peak gravity-dependent component was 34% and the bias was 22% (Fig. 1E).
When aVOR gain was decreased in RSD position, the peak-to-peak gain of the gravity-dependent component was maximal when the animal was tested in frontal plane (–33%, Fig. 1G). The peak-to-peak gravity-dependent component was minimal when tested in the sagittal plane (–2%, Fig. 1I) and was at an intermediate level when the animal was tested in the 315°/135° plane (–21%, Fig. 1H). The peak-to-peak gravity-independent gain changes were –18, –16, and –17%, respectively, when tested in these three planes. The results were similar for another animal.
Thus the bias or gravity-independent component was relatively invariant regardless of the plane in which the head was tilted. This shows that there is a gravity-independent gain change, which is distributed over all head positions. In contrast, the absolute value of the peak-to-peak gravity-dependent component varied between 4 and 42% in one animal and between 2 and 33% in another animal according to the angle between the plane of testing and the plane that contained the head position in which the gain had been adapted. It was maximal when the two were coincident and minimal when they were orthogonal.
There was no difference in the results after adaptation in the LSD and RSD positions for gain increase in the two monkeys, and these data were combined to obtain the means and SDs of the peak-to-peak gravity-dependent and -independent gain changes (Table 1). The same was true for gain decrease in the LSD and RSD positions, and the data related to these two positions were also combined. When results of the gain increase and decrease were compared, there was no statistical difference in absolute values of gravity-dependent gain changes after adaptation on side. The same was true for gravity-independent components. Thus for side-down adaptations, the peak-to-peak average gravity-dependent gain change was 31.6 ± 11.3% and gravity-independent change was 23.1 ± 6.8%.
|
These results raised the question of whether there would be a gravity-dependent component if the animals were adapted in the upright position. Furthermore, we questioned whether the gravity-dependent components would depend on the plane of tilt because every plane would include the upright position. The gravity-dependent components were similar regardless of the planes of tilt in both animals (P = 0.2). Moreover, the gravity-independent components were equivalent for head tilt in any direction. The gravity-dependent changes were comparable when the gain was increased and decreased in M0102 (18.1 ± 3.7 vs. 17.9 ± 1.1, P = 0.92), whereas the gravity-independent components were bigger after gain decrease (15.1 ± 3.3) than gain increase (6.2 ± 1.3, P = 0.003). Only gain decrease was tested after adaptation in the upright position in M17115. Although both components were larger than in the other experiments, the gravity-dependent and -independent components were comparable (–40.3 ± 8.1 vs. –36.0 ± 4.7, respectively).
Thus both gravity-dependent and -independent components were produced after adaptation in the upright position, but in contrast to the gain changes in side-down and prone-supine positions, the gravity-dependent component was similar for every plane of tilt. These data further show that the horizontal VOR gain changes after adaptation in any position are composed of two components.
The individual gain changes in the head orientations in which the gains were determined were used to construct a surface using a spline interpolation to visualize the adaptive changes in three dimensions. After gain increase while RSD (Fig. 2A, blue arrow), the gain changes were maximal (40%, red) when RSD and gradually decreased (yellow to green to blue) to 0% as the animal was oriented away from the RSD position. When the gain was decreased while LSD (Fig. 2B, yellow arrow), the maximal gain changes (–40%, blue) occurred with the animal in the LSD position and changes gradually decreased to –5% as the animal was oriented away from LSD (green to yellow to red). Similar gain changes in three dimensions occurred after the aVOR gain was increased while prone (Fig. 2C, blue arrow) or decreased while supine (Fig. 2D, yellow arrow). In each case, the maximal gain changes occurred in the head position in which the gain was adapted, and the gain changes declined as the animal was tilted away from that position. The variation in the gain changes was relatively small when the head was tilted orthogonal to the plane that contained the position in which the gain was adapted.
|
+ B1) + C. When the animal was tilted about arbitrary axes in three dimensions, the changes would be approximated by y = A · cos (
+ B2) · cos ( + B1) + C. We demonstrated previously that the peak-to-peak gravity-dependent component is of comparable magnitude to the gravity-independent component at all times during adaptation (Xiang et al. 2004). Based on this result, we simplified our model by assuming that A = C. Based on these assumptions, gain surfaces were generated (Fig. 2, E–H) that compared favorably with the corresponding surfaces generated by the spline fits to the experimental data (Fig. 2, A–D). There were local differences when the animal was tested in the prone position after adaptation while supine (Fig. 2, D and H). Overall, however, the similarities in the surfaces of the gain curves support the idea that the changes in aVOR gains declined sinusoidally as the head is moved away in any direction from the position of maximal gain change in three dimensions.
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
Our previous studies of gravity-dependent adaptation of the vertical aVOR had suggested such an organization exists, but the studies were confined to one plane (Yakushin et al. 2003a–c). The present results extend this to show that the changes in aVOR gains decline sinusoidally as the head is moved away in any direction from the position of maximal gain change regardless of the head position in which the aVOR gain was adapted. Moreover, the gravity-independent gain changes obtained for tilts in four different planes were comparable, demonstrating that they are uniformly distributed in three dimensions. Our previous studies showed that both the gravity-dependent and -independent components could be predicted in one plane if the aVOR gain was measured in the position of adaptation and the opposite head orientation (Yakushin et al. 2000a, 2003c). The present results extend this to show that it is possible to predict both components for any head orientation in three dimensions from measurements of gain in the position of adaptation.
The functional significance of gravity-dependent gain changes is of considerable interest (see Shelhamer and Zee 2003 for review). Because of the close association of the aVOR with stabilization of vision, we posit that the function of this gravity dependence is to improve stability of visual images on the retina during angular head rotation in a gravitational environment. Reorientation of the head relative to a structured visual environment would result in different amounts of retinal slip than were encountered during the adaptation process due to differences in optic flow (Miles 1997). This would require a different gain state of the aVOR for every head position to help reduce retinal slip. One strategy to achieve this would be to set the aVOR gains to be optimal for a particular head orientation and adjust them toward the unadapted state as the head was oriented away from this position. This could be accomplished by the functional relationship of gain with head position that we have demonstrated.
In a preliminary study, gravity-dependent roll gain changes were only half of those for the horizontal and vertical aVORs (Yakushin et al. 2003d). This implies that the vestibular system has a preference for supporting compensatory eye movements along the horizontal and vertical directions. This difference between horizontal and vertical versus roll is reflected in other properties of the aVOR. The unadapted gain of the roll aVOR, which is 0.6 in humans and monkeys (Crawford and Vilis 1991; Henn et al. 1992), is substantially smaller than that of the horizontal and vertical aVOR, which are closer to unity. Similar anisotropies are also present in the visual system. Visual acuity is highest for perception of objects oriented horizontally or vertically rather than obliquely (Campbell et al. 1966; Howard and Templeton 1966). From this, we propose that the anisotropy previously shown for the visual system is global and extends to both aVOR behavior and its plasticity. That is, the aVOR gain is optimized for maintaining retinal image stability for the horizontal and vertical directions under natural conditions, and as shown here for the first time, it spatially adapts to optimize retinal stability over three-dimensional space.
|
|
GRANTS |
|---|
|
|
|
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: S. B. Yakushin, Dept. of Neurology, Box 1135, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, 1 E. 100th St., New York, NY 10029 (E-mail: sergei.yakushin{at}mssm.edu)
|
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
Baker J, Wickland C, and Peterson B. Dependence of cat vestibulo-ocular reflex direction adaptation on animal orientation during adaptation and rotation in darkness. Brain Res 408: 339–343, 1987b.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Campbell FW, Kulikowski JJ, and Levinson J. The affect of orientation on the visual resolution of gratings. J Physiol 187: 427–436, 1966.
Cohen H, Cohen B, Raphan T, and Waespe W. Habituation and adaptation of the vestibuloocular reflex: a model of differential control by the vestibulocerebellum. Exp Brain Res 90: 526–538, 1992.[Web of Science][Medline]
Crawford JD and Vilis T. Axes of eye rotation and Listing's law during rotations of the head. J Neurophysiol 65: 407–423, 1991.
Gonshor A and Melvill Jones G. Changes of human vestibulo-ocular response induced by vision-reversal during head rotation. J Physiol 234: 102P-103P, 1973.[Medline]
Henn V, Straumann D, Hess BJM, Haslwanter T, and Iida N. Three-dimensional transformations from vestibular and visual input to oculomotor output. Ann NY Acad of Sci 656: 166–180, 1992.[CrossRef]
Howard IP and Templeton WB. Human Spatial Orientation. New York: Wiley, 1966.
Lisberger SG. Neural basis for motor learning in the vestibuloocular reflex of primates. III. Computational and behavioral analysis of the sites of learning. J Neurophysiol 72: 974–998, 1994.
Lisberger SG, Miles FA, and Optican LM. Frequency selective adaptation: evidence for channels in the vestibulo-ocular reflex? J Neurosci 3: 1234–1244, 1983.[Abstract]
Miles FA. Visual stabilization of the eyes in primates. Curr Opin Neurobiol 7: 867–871, 1997.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Miles FA and Eighmy BB. Long term adaptive changes in primate vestibuloocular reflex. I. Behavioral observations. J Neurophysiol 43: 1406–1425, 1980.
National Research Council. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1996.
Reisine H and Raphan T. Neural basis for eye velocity generation in the vestibular nuclei of alert monkeys during off-vertical axis rotation. Exp Brain Res 92: 209–226, 1992.[Web of Science][Medline]
Robinson DA. A method of measuring eye movement using a scleral search coil in a magnetic field. IEEE Trans Bio-Med Electron 10: 137–145, 1963.
Sandwell DT. Biharmonic spline interpolation of GEOS-3 and SEASAT altimeter data. Geophys Res Lett 2: 139–142, 1987.
Shelhamer M and Zee DS. Context-specific adaptation and its significance for neurovestibular problems of space flight. J Vestib Res 13: 345–362, 2003.[Web of Science][Medline]
Singh A, Thau GE, Raphan T, and Cohen B. Detection of saccades by a maximum likelihood ratio criterion. Proc 34th Ann Conf Eng Biol Houston TX: 136, 1981.
Tan HS, Shelhamer M, and Zee DS. Effect of head orientation and position on vestibuloocular reflex adaptation. Ann NY Acad Sci 656: 158–165, 1992.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Tiliket C, Shelhamer M, Tan HS, and Zee DS. Adaptation of the vestibulo-ocular reflex with the head in different orientations and positions relative to the axis of body rotation. J Vestib Res 3: 181–195, 1993.[Medline]
Tiliket C, Shelhamer M, Roberts D, and Zee DS. Short-term vestibulo-ocular reflex adaptation in humans. I. Effect on the ocular motor velocity-to-position neural integrator. Exp Brain Res 100: 316–327, 1994.[Web of Science][Medline]
Xiang Y, Raphan T, Cohen B and Yakushin SB. Gravity-dependent and gravity-independent gain changes during vertical vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) adaptation. J Gravit Physiol 11:9–12, 2004.
Yakushin SB, Bukharina SE, Raphan T, Buettner-Ennever J, and Cohen B. Adaptive changes in the angular VOR: duration of gain changes and lack of effect of nodulo-uvulectomy. Ann NY Acad Sci 1004: 78–93, 2003a.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Yakushin SB, Palla A, Haslwanter T, Bockisch CJ, and Straumann D. Dependence of adaptation of the human vertical angular vestibulo-ocular reflex on gravity. Exp Brain Res 152: 137–142, 2003b.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Yakushin SB, Raphan T, and Cohen B. Context-specific adaptation of the vertical vestibuloocular reflex with regard to gravity. J Neurophysiol 84: 3067–3071, 2000a.
Yakushin SB, Raphan T, and Cohen B. Gravity specific adaptation of the vertical angular vestibulo-ocular reflex; dependence on head orientation with regard to gravity. J Neurophysiol 89: 571–586, 2003c.
Yakushin SB, Reisine H, Büttner-Ennever J, Raphan T, and Cohen B. Functions of the nucleus of the optic tract (NOT). I. Adaptation of the gain of the horizontal vestibulo-ocular reflex. Exp Brain Res 131: 416–432, 2000b.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Yakushin SB, Xiang Y, Raphan T, and Cohen B. Gravity dependent adaptation of the angular vestibulo-ocular reflex in three dimensions. Soc Neurosci Abstr 593.595, 2003d.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. B. Yakushin, Y. Xiang, B. Cohen, and T. Raphan Dependence of the Roll Angular Vestibuloocular Reflex (aVOR) on Gravity J Neurophysiol, November 1, 2009; 102(5): 2616 - 2626. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Xiang, S. B. Yakushin, B. Cohen, and T. Raphan Modeling Gravity-Dependent Plasticity of the Angular Vestibuloocular Reflex With a Physiologically Based Neural Network J Neurophysiol, December 1, 2006; 96(6): 3349 - 3361. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Visit Other APS Journals Online |
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
