JN Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (March 29, 2006). doi:10.1152/jn.01163.2005
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
96/1/486    most recent
01163.2005v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 Park, S.
Right arrow Articles by Merfeld, D. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Park, S.
Right arrow Articles by Merfeld, D. M.
Submitted on November 3, 2005
Accepted on March 20, 2006

Roll rotation cues influence roll tilt perception assayed using a somatosensory technique

Sukyung Park1, Claire Gianna-Poulin2, F. Owen Black2, Scott J Wood2, and Daniel M. Merfeld3*

1 Jenks Vestibular Physiology Lab, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, Massachusetts, United States; Department of Otology and Laryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States; Department of Mechanical Engineering, KAIST, Taejon, Korea, Republic of
2 Neuro-otology Research, Legacy Clinical Research and Technology Center, Portland, Oregon, United States
3 Jenks Vestibular Physiology Lab, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, Massachusetts, United States; Department of Otology and Laryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: dan_merfeld{at}meei.harvard.edu.

We investigated how the nervous system processes ambiguous cues from the otolith organs by measuring roll tilt perception elicited by two motion paradigms. In one paradigm (Tilt), 8 subjects were sinusoidally tilted in roll with the axis of rotation near ear-level. Stimulus frequencies ranged from 0.005 to 0.7 Hz and the peak amplitude of tilt was 20 deg. During this paradigm, subjects experienced a sinusoidal variation of inter-aural gravitational force with a peak of 0.34 G. The second motion paradigm (Translation) was designed to yield the same sinusoidal variation in inter-aural force, but did not include a roll canal cue. This was achieved by sinusoidally translating the subjects along their inter-aural axis. For the 0.7 Hz Translation trial, the subjects were simply translated from side-to-side. A centrifuge was used for the 0.005 to 0.5 Hz Translation trials; the subjects were rotated in yaw at 250 deg/s for 5 minutes before initiating sinusoidal translations yielding an inter-aural otolith stimulus composed of both centrifugal and radial acceleration. Using a somatosensory task to measure roll tilt perception, we found substantial differences in tilt perception during the two motion paradigms. Since the primary difference between the two motion paradigms was the presence of roll canal cues during roll tilt trials, these perceptual differences suggest that canal cues influence tilt perception. Specifically, rotational cues provided by the semicircular canals help the central nervous system resolve ambiguous otolith cues during head tilt, yielding more accurate tilt perception.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
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]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
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]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2006 by the The American Physiological Society.