Object-Centered Direction Selectivity in the Macaque Supplementary Eye Field

Olson, C.Erik; Gettner, SN

doi:10.1126/science.7638625

Cited by 223 publications

(131 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

124

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One explanation for this pattern is that they indicate involvement in response preparation and/or execution. Indeed, the frontal eye field and supplementary eye field have been found to play crucial roles in the planning of voluntary eye movement responses based on single-cell and neuroimaging studies (e.g., Chen and Wise, 1995;Curtis, 2006;Funahashi et al, 1991Funahashi et al, , 1989Hanes et al, 1995;Schall, 1991;Mann et al, 1988;Olson and Gettner, 1995;Schlag and Schlag-Rey, 1987;Tehovnik et al, 2000). Based on the patterns in the time courses and consideration of the timing of the components of the ODR trials, our results provide additional evidence that these regions play a role in response preparation.…”

Section: Discerning Functional Roles Based On Differences In the Timementioning

confidence: 56%

Circuitry underlying temporally extended spatial working memory

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extended maintenance delays decrease the accuracy of information stored in spatial working memory. In order to elucidate the network underlying sustained spatial working memory, 16 subjects were scanned using fast event-related fMRI as they performed an oculomotor delayed response task containing trials with "short" (2.5 s) or "long" (10 s) delay periods. Multiple cortical and subcortical regions were common to both delay trial types indicating core task regions. Three patterns of activity were found in a subset of core regions that reflect underlying processes: maintenance-related (e.g., left FEF, right supramarginal gyrus (SMG)), response planning-related (e.g., right FEF, SEF), and motor response-related (e.g., lateral cerebellum (declive)) activation. Several regions were more active during long than short delay trials, including multiple sites in DLPFC (BA 9, 46), indicating a circuitry dynamically recruited to support sustained working memory. Our results suggest that specialized brain processes support extended periods of working memory.

show abstract

Section: Discerning Functional Roles Based On Differences In the Timementioning

confidence: 56%

Circuitry underlying temporally extended spatial working memory

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been known for a long time that each hemisphere of the human brain preferentially processes contralateral egocentric spatial information (Tootell et al, 1982). Recently, it has been found that supplementary eye field neurons coding object-centered direction of saccades were distributed mainly in the contralateral hemisphere (Olson and Gettner, 1995), which indicated that each hemisphere mainly processed contralateral allocentric representation (Olson and Gettner, 1996).…”

Section: Hemispheric Asymmetry In Egocentric Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asymmetric Influence of Egocentric Representation onto Allocentric Perception

Zhou

Liu²,

Zhang³

et al. 2012

Journal of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objects in the visual world can be represented in both egocentric and allocentric coordinates. Previous studies have found that allocentric representation can affect the accuracy of spatial judgment relative to an egocentric frame, but not vice versa. Here we asked whether egocentric representation influenced the processing speed of allocentric perception. We measured the manual reaction time of human subjects in a position discrimination task in which the behavioral response purely relied on the target's allocentric location, independent of its egocentric position. We used two conditions of stimulus location: the compatible condition-allocentric left and egocentric left or allocentric right and egocentric right; the incompatible condition-allocentric left and egocentric right or allocentric right and egocentric left. We found that egocentric representation markedly influenced allocentric perception in three ways. First, in a given egocentric location, allocentric perception was significantly faster in the compatible condition than in the incompatible condition. Second, as the target became more eccentric in the visual field, the speed of allocentric perception gradually slowed down in the incompatible condition but remained unchanged in the compatible condition. Third, egocentric-allocentric incompatibility slowed allocentric perception more in the left egocentric side than the right egocentric side. These results cannot be explained by interhemispheric visuomotor transformation and stimulus-response compatibility theory. Our findings indicate that each hemisphere preferentially processes and integrates the contralateral egocentric and allocentric spatial information, and the right hemisphere receives more ipsilateral egocentric inputs than left hemisphere does.

show abstract

“…Chen and Wise also suggested that the SEFs are part of a neural system "learning flexible, non-spatial stimulus-response relations" (p. 1101). Further evidence for object-centered response properties of neurons in the SEFs comes from single-cell recordings by Olson and Gettner (1995, 1999. They found SEF neurons that were activated most strongly when the animals were preparing saccadic eye movements to particular locations on a stimulus, irrespective of its absolute position.…”

Section: Possible Neural Correlatesmentioning

confidence: 99%