JN AJP citation statistics
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (July 16, 2008). doi:10.1152/jn.90257.2008
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
100/3/1488    most recent
90257.2008v1
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 Web of Science
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McArthur, K. L.
Right arrow Articles by Dickman, J. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McArthur, K. L.
Right arrow Articles by Dickman, J. D.
Submitted on February 8, 2008
Revised on May 30, 2008
Accepted on July 4, 2008

Canal and otolith contributions to compensatory tilt responses in pigeons

Kimberly L. McArthur1 and J. David Dickman1*

1 Washington University

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: ddickman{at}wustl.edu.

Gaze stabilizing eye and head responses compensate more effectively for low-frequency rotational motion when such motion stimulates the otolith organs, as during earth-horizontal axis rotations. However, the nature of the otolith signal responsible for this improvement in performance has not been previously determined. In the current study, we used combinations of earth-horizontal axis rotational and translational motion to manipulate the magnitude of net linear acceleration experienced by pigeons, under both head-fixed and head-free conditions. We demonstrate that phase enhancement of eye and head responses to low frequency rotational motion was causally related to the magnitude of dynamic net linear acceleration, not the gravitational acceleration component. We also show that canal-driven and otolith-driven eye responses were both spatially and temporally appropriate to combine linearly, and that a simple linear model combining canal- and otolith-driven components predicted eye responses to complex motion that were consistent with our experimental observations. However, the same model did not predict the observed head responses, which were spatially but not temporally appropriate to combine according to the same linear scheme. These results suggest that distinct vestibular processing substrates exist for eye and head responses in pigeons, and that these are likely different from the vestibular processing substrates observed in primates.







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