Literature DB >> 2278939

Short latency ocular-following responses in man.

R S Gellman1, J R Carl, F A Miles.   

Abstract

The ocular-following responses elicited by brief unexpected movements of the visual scene were studied in human subjects. Response latencies varied with the type of stimulus and decreased systematically with increasing stimulus speed but, unlike those of monkeys, were not solely determined by the temporal frequency generated by sine-wave stimuli. Minimum latencies (70-75 ms) were considerably shorter than those reported for other visually driven eye movements. The magnitude of the responses to sine-wave stimuli changed markedly with stimulus speed and only slightly with spatial frequency over the ranges used. When normalized with respect to spatial frequency, all responses shared the same dependence on temporal frequency (band-pass characteristics with a peak at 16 Hz), indicating that temporal frequency, rather than speed per se, was the limiting factor over the entire range examined. This suggests that the underlying motion detectors respond to the local changes in luminance associated with the motion of the scene. Movements of the scene in the immediate wake of a saccadic eye movement were on average twice as effective as movements 600 ms later: post-saccadic enhancement. Less enhancement was seen in the wake of saccade-like shifts of the scene, which themselves elicited weak ocular following, something not seen in the wake of real saccades. We suggest that there are central mechanisms that, on the one hand, prevent the ocular-following system from tracking the visual disturbances created by saccades but, on the other, promote tracking of any subsequent disturbance and thereby help to suppress post-saccadic drift. Partitioning the visual scene into central and peripheral regions revealed that motion in the periphery can exert a weak modulatory influence on ocular-following responses resulting from motion at the center. We suggest that this may help the moving observer to stabilize his/her eyes on nearby stationary objects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2278939     DOI: 10.1017/s0952523800000158

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vis Neurosci        ISSN: 0952-5238            Impact factor:   3.241


  72 in total

1.  Version and vergence eye movements in humans: open-loop dynamics determined by monocular rather than binocular image speed.

Authors:  G S Masson; D-S Yang; F A Miles
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  Reversed short-latency ocular following.

Authors:  G S Masson; D-S Yang; F A Miles
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Parallel motion processing for the initiation of short-latency ocular following in humans.

Authors:  Guillaume S Masson; Eric Castet
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2002-06-15       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Short-latency ocular following in humans is dependent on absolute (rather than relative) binocular disparity.

Authors:  D-S Yang; F A Miles
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Short-latency disparity-vergence eye movements in humans: sensitivity to simulated orthogonal tropias.

Authors:  D-S Yang; E J FitzGibbon; F A Miles
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Early behavior of optokinetic responses elicited by transparent motion stimuli during depth-based attention.

Authors:  Masaki Maruyama; Tetsuo Kobayashi; Takusige Katsura; Shinya Kuriki
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-06-13       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Interaction of active and passive slow eye movement systems.

Authors:  R Worfolk; G R Barnes
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Oculo-manual coordination control: ocular and manual tracking of visual targets with delayed visual feedback of the hand motion.

Authors:  J L Vercher; G M Gauthier
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Human ocular following responses are plastic: evidence for control by temporal frequency-dependent cortical adaptation.

Authors:  T Maddess; M R Ibbotson
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Preference suppression caused by misattribution of task-irrelevant subliminal motion.

Authors:  Kazuhisa Shibata; Takeo Watanabe
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 5.349

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.