Saccade learning with concurrent cortical and subcortical basal ganglia loops

The Basal Ganglia is a central structure involved in multiple cortical and subcortical loops. Some of these loops are believed to be responsible for saccade target selection. We study here how the very specific structural relationships of these saccadic loops can affect the ability of learning spatial and feature-based tasks. We propose a model of saccade generation with reinforcement learning capabilities based on our previous basal ganglia and superior colliculus models. It is structured around the interactions of two parallel cortico-basal loops and one tecto-basal loop. The two cortical loops separately deal with spatial and non-spatial information to select targets in a concurrent way. The subcortical loop is used to make the final target selection leading to the production of the saccade. These different loops may work in concert or disturb each other regarding reward maximization. Interactions between these loops and their learning capabilities are tested on different saccade tasks. The results show the ability of this model to correctly learn basic target selection based on different criteria (spatial or not). Moreover the model reproduces and explains training dependent express saccades toward targets based on a spatial criterion. Finally, the model predicts that in absence of prefrontal control, the spatial loop should dominate

High-field fMRI reveals brain activation patterns underlying saccade execution in the human superior colliculus

Background The superior colliculus (SC) has been shown to play a crucial role in the initiation and coordination of eye- and head-movements. The knowledge about the function of this structure is mainly based on single-unit recordings in animals with relatively few neuroimaging studies investigating eye-movement related brain activity in humans. Methodology/Principal Findings The present study employed high-field (7 Tesla) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to investigate SC responses during endogenously cued saccades in humans. In response to centrally presented instructional cues, subjects either performed saccades away from (centrifugal) or towards (centripetal) the center of straight gaze or maintained fixation at the center position. Compared to central fixation, the execution of saccades elicited hemodynamic activity within a network of cortical and subcortical areas that included the SC, lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN), occipital cortex, striatum, and the pulvinar. Conclusions/Significance Activity in the SC was enhanced contralateral to the direction of the saccade (i.e., greater activity in the right as compared to left SC during leftward saccades and vice versa) during both centrifugal and centripetal saccades, thereby demonstrating that the contralateral predominance for saccade execution that has been shown to exist in animals is also present in the human SC. In addition, centrifugal saccades elicited greater activity in the SC than did centripetal saccades, while also being accompanied by an enhanced deactivation within the prefrontal default-mode network. This pattern of brain activity might reflect the reduced processing effort required to move the eyes toward as compared to away from the center of straight gaze, a position that might serve as a spatial baseline in which the retinotopic and craniotopic reference frames are aligned

Neural Dynamics of Saccadic and Smooth Pursuit Eye Movement Coordination during Visual Tracking of Unpredictably Moving Targets

How does the brain use eye movements to track objects that move in unpredictable directions and speeds? Saccadic eye movements rapidly foveate peripheral visual or auditory targets and smooth pursuit eye movements keep the fovea pointed toward an attended moving target. Analyses of tracking data in monkeys and humans reveal systematic deviations from predictions of the simplest model of saccade-pursuit interactions, which would use no interactions other than common target selection and recruitment of shared motoneurons. Instead, saccadic and smooth pursuit movements cooperate to cancel errors of gaze position and velocity, and thus to maximize target visibility through time. How are these two systems coordinated to promote visual localization and identification of moving targets? How are saccades calibrated to correctly foveate a target despite its continued motion during the saccade? A neural model proposes answers to such questions. The modeled interactions encompass motion processing areas MT, MST, FPA, DLPN and NRTP; saccade planning and execution areas FEF and SC; the saccadic generator in the brain stem; and the cerebellum. Simulations illustrate the model’s ability to functionally explain and quantitatively simulate anatomical, neurophysiological and behavioral data about SAC-SPEM tracking.National Science Foundation (SBE-0354378); Office of Naval Research (N00014-01-1-0624

Neural Dynamics of Saccadic and Smooth Pursuit Eye Movement Coordination during Visual Tracking of Unpredictably Moving Targets

How does the brain use eye movements to track objects that move in unpredictable directions and speeds? Saccadic eye movements rapidly foveate peripheral visual or auditory targets and smooth pursuit eye movements keep the fovea pointed toward an attended moving target. Analyses of tracking data in monkeys and humans reveal systematic deviations from predictions of the simplest model of saccade-pursuit interactions, which would use no interactions other than common target selection and recruitment of shared motoneurons. Instead, saccadic and smooth pursuit movements cooperate to cancel errors of gaze position and velocity, and thus to maximize target visibility through time. How are these two systems coordinated to promote visual localization and identification of moving targets? How are saccades calibrated to correctly foveate a target despite its continued motion during the saccade? A neural model proposes answers to such questions. The modeled interactions encompass motion processing areas MT, MST, FPA, DLPN and NRTP; saccade planning and execution areas FEF and SC; the saccadic generator in the brain stem; and the cerebellum. Simulations illustrate the model’s ability to functionally explain and quantitatively simulate anatomical, neurophysiological and behavioral data about SAC-SPEM tracking.National Science Foundation (SBE-0354378); Office of Naval Research (N00014-01-1-0624

Target Selection by Frontal Cortex During Coordinated Saccadic and Smooth Pursuit Eye Movement

Oculomotor tracking of moving objects is an important component of visually based cognition and planning. Such tracking is achieved by a combination of saccades and smooth pursuit eye movements. In particular, the saccadic and smooth pursuit systems interact to often choose the same target, and to maximize its visibility through time. How do multiple brain regions interact, including frontal cortical areas, to decide the choice of a target among several competing moving stimuli? How is target selection information that is created by a bias (e.g., electrical stimulation) transferred from one movement system to another? These saccade-pursuit interactions are clarified by a new computational neural model, which describes interactions among motion processing areas MT, MST, FPA, DLPN; saccade specification, selection, and planning areas LIP, FEF, SNr, SC; the saccadic generator in the brain stem; and the cerebellum. Model simulations explain a broad range of neuroanatomical and neurophysiological data. These results are in contrast with the simplest parallel model with no interactions between saccades and pursuit than common-target selection and recruitment of shared motoneurons. Actual tracking episodes in primates reveal multiple systematic deviations from predictions of the simplest parallel model, which are explained by the current model.National Science Foundation (SBE-0354378); Office of Naval Research (N00014-01-1-0624

Exploration of the functional consequences of fixational eye movements in the absence of a fovea.

A recent theory posits that ocular drifts of fixational eye movements serve to reformat the visual input of natural images, so that the power of the input image is equalized across a range of spatial frequencies. This "spectral whitening" effect is postulated to improve the processing of high-spatial-frequency information and requires normal fixational eye movements. Given that people with macular disease exhibit abnormal fixational eye movements, do they also exhibit spectral whitening? To answer this question, we computed the power spectral density of movies of natural images translated in space and time according to the fixational eye movements (thus simulating the retinal input) of a group of observers with long-standing bilateral macular disease. Just as for people with normal vision, the power of the retinal input at low spatial frequencies was lower than that based on the 1/f2 relationship, demonstrating spectral whitening. However, the amount of whitening was much less for observers with macular disease when compared with age-matched controls with normal vision. A mediation analysis showed that the eccentricity of the preferred retinal locus adopted by these observers and the characteristics of ocular drifts are important factors limiting the amount of whitening. Finally, we did not find a normal aging effect on spectral whitening. Although these findings alone cannot form a causal link between macular disease and spectral properties of eye movements, they suggest novel potential means of modifying the characteristics of fixational eye movements, which may in turn improve functional vision for people with macular disease

How Laminar Frontal Cortex and Basal Ganglia Circuits Interact to Control Planned and Reactive Saccades

The basal ganglia and frontal cortex together allow animals to learn adaptive responses that acquire rewards when prepotent reflexive responses are insufficient. Anatomical studies show a rich pattern of interactions between the basal ganglia and distinct frontal cortical layers. Analysis of the laminar circuitry of the frontal cortex, together with its interactions with the basal ganglia, motor thalamus, superior colliculus, and inferotemporal and parietal cortices, provides new insight into how these brain regions interact to learn and perform complexly conditioned behaviors. A neural model whose cortical component represents the frontal eye fields captures these interacting circuits. Simulations of the neural model illustrate how it provides a functional explanation of the dynamics of 17 physiologically identified cell types found in these areas. The model predicts how action planning or priming (in cortical layers III and VI) is dissociated from execution (in layer V), how a cue may serve either as a movement target or as a discriminative cue to move elsewhere, and how the basal ganglia help choose among competing actions. The model simulates neurophysiological, anatomical, and behavioral data about how monkeys perform saccadic eye movement tasks, including fixation; single saccade, overlap, gap, and memory-guided saccades; anti-saccades; and parallel search among distractors.Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Office of Naval Research (N00014-95-l-0409, N00014-92-J-1309, N00014-95-1-0657); National Science Foundation (IRI-97-20333)

A competitive integration model of exogenous and endogenous eye movements

We present a model of the eye movement system in which the programming of an eye movement is the result of the competitive integration of information in the superior colliculi (SC). This brain area receives input from occipital cortex, the frontal eye fields, and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, on the basis of which it computes the location of the next saccadic target. Two critical assumptions in the model are that cortical inputs are not only excitatory, but can also inhibit saccades to specific locations, and that the SC continue to influence the trajectory of a saccade while it is being executed. With these assumptions, we account for many neurophysiological and behavioral findings from eye movement research. Interactions within the saccade map are shown to account for effects of distractors on saccadic reaction time (SRT) and saccade trajectory, including the global effect and oculomotor capture. In addition, the model accounts for express saccades, the gap effect, saccadic reaction times for antisaccades, and recorded responses from neurons in the SC and frontal eye fields in these tasks. © The Author(s) 2010