These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Interaction of smooth pursuit and the vestibuloocular reflex in three dimensions.
    Author: Misslisch H, Tweed D, Fetter M, Dichgans J, Vilis T.
    Journal: J Neurophysiol; 1996 Jun; 75(6):2520-32. PubMed ID: 8793761.
    Abstract:
    1. What is the neural mechanism of vestibuloocular reflex (VOR) cancellation when a subject fixates a target moving with the head? One theory is that the moving target evokes pursuit eye movements that add to and cancel the VOR. A recent finding with implications for this theory is that eye velocity vectors of both pursuit and the VOR vary with eye position, but in different ways, because pursuit follows Listing's law whereas the VOR obeys a "half-Listing" strategy. As a result, pursuit cannot exactly cancel the VOR in most eye positions, and so the pursuit superposition theory predicts an eye-position-dependent pattern of residual eye velocities during cancellation. To test these predictions, we measured eye velocity vectors in humans during VOR, pursuit, and cancellation in response to torsional, vertical, and horizontal stimuli with the eyes in different positions. 2. For example, if a subject is rolling clockwise (CW, frequency 0.3 Hz, maximum speed 37.5 deg/s) while looking 20 deg up, the VOR generates an eye velocity that is mainly counterclockwise (CCW), but also leftward. If we then turn on a small target light, located 20 deg up and moving with the subject, then pursuit superposition predicts that the CCW component of eye velocity will shrink and the horizontal component will reverse, from leftward to rightward. This pattern was seen in all subjects. 3. Velocities depended on eye position in the predicted way; e.g., when subjects looked 20 deg down, instead of 20 deg up, during CW roll, the reversal of horizontal eye velocity went the other way, from rightward to leftward. And when gaze was 20 deg right or left, analogous reversals occurred in the vertical eye velocity, again as predicted. 4. Analogous predictions for horizontal and vertical stimulation were also borne out by the data. For example, when subjects rotated rightward while looking 20 deg up, the VOR response was leftward and CCW. When the target light switched on, the torsional component of the response reversed, becoming CW. And analogous predictions for other eye positions and for vertical stimulation also held. 5. For all axes of stimulation and all eye positions, eye velocity during cancellation was roughly parallel with the gaze line. This alignment is predicted by pursuit superposition and has the effect of reducing retinal image slip over the fovea. 6. The fact that the complex dependence of eye velocity on the stimulation axis and eye position predicted by pursuit superposition was seen in all subjects and conditions suggests strongly that the VOR indeed is canceled additively by pursuit. However, eye velocities during cancellation were consistently smaller than predicted. This shrinkage indicates that a second mechanism, besides pursuit superposition, attenuates eye velocities during cancellation. The results can be explained if VOR gain is reduced by approximately 30%, and if, in addition, pursuit is driven by retinal slip rather than reconstructed target velocity in space.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]