Literature DB >> 15590732

fMRI activation in the human frontal eye field is correlated with saccadic reaction time.

Jason D Connolly1, Melvyn A Goodale, Herbert C Goltz, Douglas P Munoz.   

Abstract

Variation in response latency to identical sensory stimuli has been attributed to variation in neural activity mediating preparatory set. Here we report evidence for a relationship between saccadic reaction time (SRT) and set-related brain activity measured with event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging. We measured hemodynamic activation time-courses during a preparatory "gap" period, during which no visual stimulus was present and no saccades were made. The subjects merely anticipated appearance of the target. Saccade direction and latency were recorded during scanning, and trials were sorted according to SRT. Both the frontal (FEF) and supplementary eye fields showed pre-target preparatory activity, but only in the FEF was this activity correlated with SRT. Activation in the intraparietal sulcus did not show any preparatory activity. These data provide evidence that the human FEF plays a central role in saccade initiation; pre-target activity in this region predicts both the type of eye movement (whether the subject will look toward or away from the target) and when a future saccade will occur.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15590732     DOI: 10.1152/jn.00830.2004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  47 in total

1.  Event-related potentials before saccades and antisaccades and their relation to reaction time.

Authors:  Marianna Papadopoulou; Ioannis Evdokimidis; Evangelos Tsoukas; Asimakis Mantas; Nikolaos Smyrnis
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-08-14       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Saccadic preparation in the frontal eye field is modulated by distinct trial history effects as revealed by magnetoencephalography.

Authors:  Adrian K C Lee; Matti S Hämäläinen; Kara A Dyckman; Jason J S Barton; Dara S Manoach
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2010-06-03       Impact factor: 5.357

3.  Dissociating bottom-up and top-down processes in a manual stimulus-response compatibility task.

Authors:  Edna C Cieslik; Karl Zilles; Florian Kurth; Simon B Eickhoff
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-06-23       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Delay-period activity in the prefrontal cortex: one function is sensory gating.

Authors:  Bradley R Postle
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 3.225

5.  Preparatory delay activity in the monkey parietal reach region predicts reach reaction times.

Authors:  Lawrence H Snyder; Anthony R Dickinson; Jeffrey L Calton
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-10-04       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Saccade preparation signals in the human frontal and parietal cortices.

Authors:  Clayton E Curtis; Jason D Connolly
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2007-11-21       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Antisaccade cost is modulated by contextual experience of location probability.

Authors:  Chia-Lun Liu; Hui-Yan Chiau; Philip Tseng; Daisy L Hung; Ovid J L Tzeng; Neil G Muggleton; Chi-Hung Juan
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-12-23       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Cortical activity time locked to the shift and maintenance of spatial attention.

Authors:  Akiko Ikkai; Clayton E Curtis
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2007-10-05       Impact factor: 5.357

9.  Activity in the human superior colliculus relating to endogenous saccade preparation and execution.

Authors:  Michele Furlan; Andrew T Smith; Robin Walker
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-06-03       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Anomalous use of context during task preparation in schizophrenia: a magnetoencephalography study.

Authors:  Dara S Manoach; Adrian K C Lee; Matti S Hämäläinen; Kara A Dyckman; Jesse S Friedman; Mark Vangel; Donald C Goff; Jason J S Barton
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 13.382

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.