The following content is provided
under a Creative Commons license.
Your support will help MIT OpenCourseWare continue
to offer high quality educational resources for free.
To make a donation or to view additional materials
from hundreds of MIT courses, visit MIT OpenCourseWare
at ocw.mit.edu
PROFESSOR: All right good afternoon everyone.
What I have on the board here is what we're going to cover today
and what we had covered the last time.
Those in blue here are the ones we have covered the last time
and the rest of them, five through nine,
are the ones we are going to cover today.
Actually the last time I didn't have this last step here,
dreaming and rapid eye-movement sleep,
if there is time I want to say a few words about that
because that's a very interesting topic
and brings us to make a few comments about Freudian theory.
All right then so we are going to then start
with a description of the cortical structures
that are involved in eye-movement control.
Now the first thing I want to do is
to show you once again the monkey brain.
You're already familiar with those items which are on here.
Here's V1, here's V4, here's the superior temporal sulcus
that contains areas MT and MST and of course
here's the central sulcus, principalis, and the arcuate.
Another structure involved in eye-movement control
is the lateral intraparietal sulcus which is in here,
and then another one is the medial intraparietal sulcus
but those two perform service similar tasks
and so I'm not going to talk about the MIP
separately from LIP.
And then here in the frontal lobe
we have the frontal eye fields as the name implies of course,
it has a lot to do with eye-movement control
and then here very close to the midline
we have the medial eye fields which
also play a role in eye movement control.
So now we have all these structures
and this is not by any means totally complete,
because these deal mostly with saccadic eye movements
and to a lesser degree with pursuit eye movements
but the fact is it that all these areas that
play a significant role in eye-movement control
and of course, those people who want to understand
eye-movement control need to figure out
what these various structures do for you to enable you to look
around with the great ease that you can look around
with actually.
So anyway let's try a number of views
of how to go about finding out the operational characteristics
of these areas and furthermore also to find out
how they interconnect.
Now one approach that has been very useful in delineating
the areas in the visual cortex and even in subcortical areas
is to use electrical stimulation.
Because it has been found as, as we had discussed
like the last time that when you electrically stimulate
some structures heavily involved in eye movement
control of like the colliculus, at low current levels
electrical stimulation can elicit a saccade
and by looking at the characteristics of that
as we had in the colliculus, you can gain further insight
about what the roles are of these various areas.
And of course people have done electrical stimulation
all over creation in the visual cortex
as well as in other cortical areas,
thereby trying to determine whether or not
the electrical stimulation elicits a motor response
and of course if you do this in motor cortex
then you get a motor response and if you do
do it in areas which is specifically connected
with eye-movement control you get eye movement.
So here is an example of the kinds of things we can do.
Here is a monkey brain and of course
as we have discussed already, from the brain stem
the signal is sent to the eye muscles which provides
the so-called rate code and then above that
via the superior colliculus and then in the back
we have V1 that you're already familiar with V2, LIP,
frontal eye fields, and the medial eye fields.
So now let's ask the question, what
happens when you electrically stimulate these cortical areas?
And also to compare that with what
happens when you stimulate in the superior colliculus.
So we already know that when you stimulate the colliculus what
you get is wherever you put the electrodes in the colliculus
and you find out where the receptive field is of the cells
that you will be stimulating, that when you then convert
and stimulate you get a saccade that brings
the fovea into the center of the receptive fields of the neurons
that you are stimulating and that is laid out
in a nice topographic fashion and that is shown here
in a schematic fashion.
So that no matter where the eye starts, at any given point,
if you electrically stimulate you
get the same vector saccade in the superior colliculus.
So you have what is called the vector code which
if you remember, is quite different from the code
that you have in the brain stem where you have a rate code.
So now the question is suppose we now
start stimulating these other cortical areas
that I had designated in the previous slide
and ask the question what happens in those places?
All right so if you stimulate the visual cortex in this case
V1 for example, you get the same kind of coding operation,
you get vector saccades OK, constant vector saccades.
Then if you do the same thing in LIP
you also get a constant vector saccade
and if you do that in the frontal eye fields
you still get the same thing.
So all of these areas seem to be coding saccadic vectors
but now when you stimulate in the medial eye fields
you get a very different kind of effect.
Very interesting what you get here
is what is called a place code, meaning that when you stimulate
in various regions of the medial eye fields, the eye
wherever it starts, converges on a particular point which you,
we'll call the motor field, OK?
And different regions in the medial eye fields
have motor fields that generate different locations to which
the eye will saccade when you stimulate there.
So that's a very different kind of code from all the others.
So now the next question is that you're going to pose is,
how do the signals from all these cortical areas
get down to the brain stem?
So what kind of experiment do you
think you would want to do to get some easy answers to that?
So to, to perhaps highlight that some people thought,
that the signals from all of these areas
go down to the colliculus and then the colliculus sends
its signals down to the brain stem.
So if that's the case, what would you,
what experiment would you do?
Well the experiment you would do is
you would remove the superior colliculus OK?
And then again stimulate all of these areas.
If that hypothesis, that all these areas send their signals
through the superior colliculus of the brain stem is correct,
then you would no longer get any saccades when you electrically
stimulate in the cortex at any of these sites.
Got it?
All right now, let's see if an experiment like that
had been done and yes, yes it has been.
So here it is, here we're going to remove
the superior colliculus.
All right think about it for a minute,
think what you would hypothesize will happen?
Well what happens is quite dramatic.
When you stimulate in V1, V2, and LIP
you no longer get a saccade.
Somehow the signals to generate the saccade from these areas
seem to be going through the colliculus
because once the colliculus is not there
those signals are ineffective.
Now what happens in the frontal lobe?
All right what happens there is quite interesting.
You still get saccades and you still
get the same coding operation.
You get a constant vector code when
you stimulate the frontal eye fields
and you get your place code in the medial eye fields
and you get that at the same old threshold.
So that discovery then resulted in the hypothesis first of all
that these posterior areas send the signals to the brain
stem from the colliculus which are called the posterior system
and the ones in the anterior portions of the brain
from medial and frontal eye fields
seem to be able to gain direct access bypassing
the colliculus to the brain stem is
because they're still effective when you stimulate there
and so we can call that the anterior system.
All right, now of course these two systems
need to talk to each other, which they do, there are plenty
of connections there because of course, if you will,
the left hand, it's got to know what the right hand is doing.
So anyway this is then a very summary arrangement
and now we can proceed to ask some questions
about just what do these various areas do?
And to understand that data we need
to look into more detail about the nature
of electrical stimulation and compare that
with the nature of eye movements made to visual target.
So let's look at that next time.
So we can look at the effects of paired
electrical and visual stimulation.
All right so, the first thing we're going to look at
is what happens when you stimulate
two sites say in the colliculus at the same time?
And if you remember, medial is up and lateral is down.
So if you stimulate each of those alone
you get here in number one you get an upward saccade,
you simulate number two you get a downward saccade.
Now the question comes up, what happens
when you stimulate both at the same time?
Well the number of hypotheses that
have been proposed and by now it's been well established
that what happened is that you get a vector average saccade
not vector summation, but vector averaging OK?
Now, to prove that that is indeed
vector averaging if you take the same experiment
but you put one electrode in the anterior
portion and the other electrode in the posterior
one of the colliculus, this one of course
generates a small saccade and this one a large saccade.
So if its vector averages, you should
get an in-between saccade.
If your vector sums then it should get a bigger saccade
than either of those and you indeed
get a vector average saccade.
So depending on this arrangement,
or this arrangement, you get the same vector average saccade
because the only thing that's happening here
is you excite the neurons in the colliculus
by virtue of this electrical stimulation.
Now think about that for a minute.
If this were the case with visual stimuli,
suppose two visual stimuli come up,
it would be a total disaster if you
made an eye movement between the two of them wouldn't it?
So somehow there's some mechanisms
in the brain that force you, force you,
I guess that may not be the right word,
achieve the ability to select one
or the other of the visual targets
accurately and not be vector averaging it.
Now to accomplish that logically speaking, what you need
is some inhibitory circuits and the mechanism
for selection and then a decision as to where to look.
All right so to highlight that let
me just say one more thing about electrical stimulation.
This is true what I told you about vector averaging
with electrical stimulation even when you stimulate the two,
the two superior colliculi or two different locations
in the brain each of those gives you an eye movement
into the left or right hemifield and yet
they also vector average.
So now let's look at what happens
when a similar situation is used in a real experiment where
the monkey looks at visual targets and so what you do here
is you present these two targets at the same time.
And so the monkey in a sense has to make a decision
or you have to make a decision as to where to look.
And as long as there's a nice big separation here
which is 90 degrees in this case, what you can see here
are the real eye movements that half the time the monkey looks
to the left, half the time to the right
and it makes very very few in-between saccades.
Whereas if you electrically stimulated
at these sites in the colliculus you'd
get a vector average saccade just
like what I've shown you here OK?
All right so now that being the case,
we can move on and ask some additional questions
about what happens when you bring the two
stimuli closer together, all right?
The closer together they get the more difficult
it is to make an independent decision
as to whether to look to the left or the right target that
comes up above the fixation spot.
So here's an example of that, actually what
I'm going to do is this.
Let me delay for a little bit what happens with that
and first I want to tell you about what
happens with various kinds of lesions
that you make on eye movements and then we'll
talk about this question of the angular
separation between the two visual targets.
So therefore let's do-- the reason I want to do this first
is to give you sort of a real sense when you
do very informal kind of testing and by informal testing what
I mean is that you're going to see a monkey actually
perform eye movements OK?
So here we are, here's a monkey, here's his brain so to speak
and this is what we call of course an intact animal and now
what I'm going to do, I'm going to start the movie for you
to see what kinds of eye movements
he makes when we present some apple pieces for the monkey
to eat.
OK are you ready?
Here it is.
Can everybody see this OK?
So you can see that when an apple piece appears
the monkey makes a saccade to it and grabs it and stuffs
in his mouth and eats it.
OK so that's what a normal monkey does
with his fully intact, functional brain.
So now we're going to ask the question, what
happens if you take out the colliculus on one side,
meaning a unilaterally lesion, what happens to the eye
movements the monkey makes subsequent to such a lesion?
Are you ready for that?
Here we are.
It's the same monkey.
You can see that his eye movements may
be a little bit slower perhaps but he still looks to the left
and to the right quite well.
He tends to sort of look towards the side of the lesion when
there's no stimulus OK, but other than that he seems
to make really rather, rather good eye movement in spite
of the fact that he has a colliculus missing on one side.
So what that means is that just looking at what the monkey does
in this qualitative manner is not
going to tell you too much about what these various structures
do and so consequently you have to carry out some more
refined experiments to determine what kinds of deficits
do arise when you take out the colliculus, you take out
other cortical structures for the generation of eye movement.
So let me first of all tell you about a really interesting
finding that was made that had nothing
to do with the colliculus at the time it was made,
was a strictly behavioral study much of it done on humans.
What was done is first of all a fixation spot came on
and then a single target appeared
and often what was done is that the fixation spot was turned
off just a few milliseconds before the target came
on and on each trial it appeared someplace else OK?
So then you've collected a lot of data
to see what is the nature of the monkey's eye movements
and in particular that initial study examined by Fischer
and Boch, examined what the latency distribution was
of the eye movements made and they made
an incredible discovery that they subsequently generated
hundreds of studies published in numerous journals,
and this is the discovery.
Here we have the latency of saccades made
and here's a number of saccades and what
you get is a bimodal distribution
of saccadic latencies, amazing.
They call the first mode, which takes
place in the latency of average latency for bright stimulus
over about 100 milliseconds, called express saccades.
The second mode they called regular saccades and that
took about I don't know, 135, 140 milliseconds
on the average.
So that got this bimodal distribution
and so people said, my goodness what could this be due to?
How do we explain this effect?
What other cortical or subcortical
mechanisms that give rise to a bimodal distribution
of saccadic latencies?
As I've said a huge number of experiments
had been carried out to find this out.
So when one group of investigators
saw this phenomenon and they did experiments
with monkey's and they found this
is a real effect everywhere, these findings were initially
made in Germany and even, even in the United States
you get a bimodal distribution of saccades
in both humans and monkeys.
So once it was established as a really solid effect
people began to speculate as to what are the neural,
underlying mechanisms?
And as I've told you earlier it was
noted that based on those lesion studies of the colliculus which
eliminated saccades from the posterior portion of the cortex
but not from the interior, that there
is a reasonable hypothesis involved in proposing that you
have a posterior system and an anterior system.
And so when people saw this they said aha,
now we know why we have these two systems.
One is for making rapid saccades and the other
is to making regular saccades.
And so they proposed that the posterior system does
one of these and the anterior system does the other.
Well that was a nice hypothesis but so often
when it comes to hypotheses as to how the brain works,
often most of the time the hypotheses end up being wrong
and so what you need to do rather than just hypothesize is
to actually carry out experiments
to test the hypothesis.
So what is the test of this hypothesis?
What would you do as an experimentalist?
Well, yes.
AUDIENCE: You could ablate either posterior
or the anterior pathways.
PROFESSOR: Very good you could ablate.
All right so one thing you can do
first of all you can ablate the superior colliculus even
though when you saw that just with regular easy test just
filming it, you didn't see much of a deficit.
You sort of sense that maybe the monkey's a bit slower but other
than that it wasn't that clear.
But if you take out the colliculus
then you eliminate the posterior system in essence all right,
and so the question is what happens when you do that?
And then you can ask the question
what happens when you take out some other cortical areas?
So let's look at this.
Here we have a monkey 10 weeks after the colliculus has been
ablated, we're talking about a major effect here
that doesn't recover, and you took out
the colliculus on one side on the left OK,
so that controls rightward saccades
and therefore when you look at the leftward saccades that's
to the intact side of the brain you
get the usual bimodal distribution
of saccadic latencies.
But then when you look at rightward saccades
Lo and behold, you don't see a single express saccade
and even the regular saccades have
a longer latency than the ones to they intact side
and these are collected at the same time.
The monkey's sitting there with his head fixed
and sometimes a target appears on the left
sometimes on the right and you collect hundreds of thousands
of trials that way and you test this over various time periods
and this is at least 10 weeks, 2 and 1/2 months after the lesion
and even if you test the monkey a year
later you still get the same effect.
So this clearly points out the fact
that your ability to make these rapid reflex-like saccades
is something that's got to go through the superior colliculus
OK?
So now we can ask the question, well, what about if one
makes lesions in the frontal and medial eye fields?
All right so think about that for a minute what would
you predict?
All right so here we go.
We take out the frontal eye fields in this case, ready?
Oops let me go back.
We take out the frontal eye fields
but to give you a sense of this overall effect first of all
let's just do the same informal testing that I've shown you
before with the colliculus and see
what the movie looks like OK?
Here's a monkey not as handsome as the other one,
but what you do here is a person behind
there sometimes just presents a target
and sometimes just moves it around so the monkey tracks it,
can you see that?
And what I shouldn't have told you which one I feel
have been ablated.
Look at how nicely he tracks on both sides,
grabs it, puts it in his, stuffs it in his mouth
and so the monkey seems to be perfectly fine with making
saccades to either side and perfectly fine making pursuit
eye movements either direction, indicating
that this informal testing doesn't reveal anything truly
obvious about the deficit that you have in eye movement
control when you take out the frontal eye fields.
So therefore you again need to go on
to carry out some more careful experiments
to obtain some detailed quantitative data.
So let's look at that.
First of all let's go back and look at express saccades.
You take out the frontal eye fields and Lo and behold,
you still get express saccades indicating
that that is definitely specific for the posterior system
even further if you do this experiment what
you find if you take out both the medial and frontal eye
fields you still get it, you still
get your express saccades.
So clearly these two areas are not directly involved
in generating quick rapid saccadic eye movements
and it's still bimodal so that initial hypothesis
that the first mode is the colliculus
and the second posterior system the colliculus
and the second mode is the anterior system
is clearly totally wrong.
All right so that's what then happens
and once this has been done, you say, well, you've
got to find something that the frontal eye and the medial eye
fields are doing.
So let's come up with some other experiments
to see whether the monkey is selective for anything else
when it comes to lesions of the frontal and the medial eye
fields.
All right so one thing that had been proposed
is that maybe the important factor is some high level eye
movement activity such as making saccades in quick succession
to successive targets that are out there OK?
So the way that can be done quantitatively
is you have the monkey first fixate OK,
and after they fixate you present the target
and then you present the second target.
So the monkey has to make two successive saccades
and what you can do is you can vary
the temporal delay between their succession.
So the monkey then has to make a plan to makes two saccades
because these two stimuli appear before the monkey starts
his initial saccade when the temporal interval is short.
So then the monkey somehow knows it's easier
to do, he has to do this even though he starts a saccade only
after the two targets have come on when they are presented
indeed in the short, the short latency.
So that's what happens and of course in different trials
you have different kinds of pairings like that
and if you do that what you find is very interesting
here are the four conditions, this
shows the monkey's performance 18 weeks post
left frontal eye field lesion and this shows it
60 weeks after and it shows this to the intact side
and the side where the frontal eye fields are missing
and what you can see very dramatically
is that the monkey really has difficulties
in making a plan to execute two saccades in a row.
Quite dramatic effect significant [INAUDIBLE] one
level, of course indicating that the frontal eye fields
play a role in planning sequences of eye movements.
Now then another, well this I want to show you,
what happens with the, when you compare
the effects of the frontal eye field
lesions and the medial eye field lesion
and this is done over various sequence durations
and for several weeks and what you find is that in both cases
there is a recovery but the effect
is much, much more dramatic with the frontal eye field lesion
than a medial eye field lesion.
So indeed there's for the frontal eye
fields we can say the frontal eye fields play
an important role in planning sequences of eye movements
which is sort of a high level activity in executing
saccadic eye movements.
Now then what we can do is to examine what
about making a decision of where to look when
more than one target comes up and the simplest form of that
is that you present two targets like that OK?
And so the monkey has to make a decision am
I going to look to the left or to the right?
And then what you do is you can vary
the temporal delay between the two like that, or like that OK?
And then you can do that again either to intact
parts of the visual field or those
where either frontal eye fields or some other structure
is missing.
All right so let's look at what happens.
Here is what we have is the intact monkey
this part I've shown you before.
All right this is when the two targets come
on simultaneously and in this case
the left target comes on 34 milliseconds before the right
and here's the reverse and what you
can see that even a 34 millisecond delay causes
the monkey to very much prefer to go to the, to the target,
make a saccade to the target that had appeared first.
So that's what happens in a normal intact monkey.
Now we can ask the next related questions still
in the normal intact monkey, what
happens when you put the two stimuli closer together?
OK so here's an example they're, now they're separated only
by 40 degrees and here the data again it
shows that when it's, in this case 67 milliseconds apart
the monkey chooses almost exclusively
the target that comes on first.
When they're simultaneous what happens is interesting,
you get some so-called vector average saccades
that you always get with electrical stimulation.
So those you get, it's still a minority of the saccades.
And the closer you bring the two together,
the more frequent will be the vector average saccades.
When they're only separated by set 10 degrees
they will be all vector average saccades So this
is what happens in the normal monkey you
get this nice bimodal distribution and vector
average saccades when the two are simultaneous.
Now let's ask the question what happens when you take out
a cortical structure in this case the frontal eye fields
and here we are you take out the left frontal eye fields.
These above are the same the data I just shown you
adding a bigger delay here, just to make it even clearer that
by that time the monkey never chooses
the target that comes on second.
And here we have the monkey after left frontal eye field
lesion and look at what, what happens.
What happens is that the monkey at 0
chooses 100% saccade to the intact side OK.
There seem to be a little bit of a shift here
and then when they're 100 milliseconds,
then you have an equal distribution.
So to equalize the choice that the brain makes
you have to now because of the missing frontal eye fields,
present one of the targets a 100 milliseconds earlier
on the affected side to get the same kind of distribution
that you get in the intact monkey.
So this further highlights the fact
that the frontal eye fields play a significant role
in making decisions about the selection of visual targets.
All right now we can look at this more quantitatively.
This shows the distribution of choices OK, to the left target,
this is the intact monkey preoperative
and then when you take out the left frontal eye
fields it's a huge movement over the equal choices
has to be about 130 milliseconds separated
with the affected side getting the target a 130 milliseconds
earlier.
Then if you keep doing this there's some recovery
but even four years later you still have a huge effect.
Now you can ask the question what
if you do the same experiment in the medial eye fields?
And so if you do that you first of all get a small effect
to begin with and after just 16 weeks there's full recovery.
So obviously the medial eye fields
don't, do not seem to play a central role
in making decisions as to which target
to look at when more than one target appears
in the visual field.
All right so now having done that quantitative work
indicating that the frontal eye fields play
an important role in target selection
and the sequencing of eye movements.
We can move on and ask the question,
well we talked about the posterior
system and the anterior system.
Is it true that there are these two systems?
Or are there many more systems that we're not aware of?
This should remind you of the fact
that it had been proposed when we talked
about extrastriate cortex that area of V4
essential for processing high level activity including color,
whereas the area MT and MST play an important role in emotion
and so it was purported that these two
major systems in the posterior cortex, the medial and lateral
if you will.
So the question was raised if you remove both of these areas,
meaning the gateway to these areas, V4 and MT what happens?
And when you do that they still the monkey's
able to do a lot of things indicating that we have more
pathways from V1 than just these two the anterior, the medial
and the lateral.
So now the question is what about when
it comes to this eye movement control?
We should do the same kind of experiment.
We should remove the colliculus that supposedly eliminates
the posterior system and then we should remove the frontal eye
fields bilaterally, that eliminates the anterior system.
So now the question is what happens when you do that?
And again, we going to turn to the informal test,
meaning we going to, we going to take
a movie of the monkey who has these areas removed.
Think about it for a minute what do you think's going to happen?
OK so here's the monkey.
Ready?
The monkey sees well, he makes his movements with his hands
quite accurately but what, what happens to the eyes,
you watching the eyes right?
No eye movement.
Everybody see this?
Should I show it again?
The monkey makes no eye movements.
He cannot make eye movements because his natural tendency
would be just like I'd seen in the previous movies that he
makes eye movements to the apple pieces so he can grab them.
He still pays attention to them everything
is fine except he doesn't move his eyes because he can't move
his eyes as a result of having eliminated these two
systems and because of that we can say
with confidence that it's, as far as the visual as far
as the ocular motor system is concerned we indeed have
these two major pathways which when they're eliminated
eliminates their ability to move,
make saccadic eye movements.
OK now let's go back to the effect
of electrical stimulation to gain further insight about what
these various areas do and what you
can do in these experiments is not only
to stimulate at a high level to elicit a saccade
but you can simulate at a lower level
and then pair that with the appearance of a visual target.
This then enables you to see whether there's summation here
or if there's interference, so let's look at that.
All right here is again a monkey brain
and what I'm going to tell you is what happens when you
do this experiment in V1, in LIP, and in the frontal eye
fields, even maybe I think I may have something
also in the medial eye fields.
All right so let me describe the experimental procedure for you
so that you understand how these kinds of experiments
are conducted.
You put an electrode in to any of these structures
and you find the receptive field first all right?
Once you've found the receptive field you electrically
stimulate then you confirm the fact
that the electrical stimulation brings the fovea
into the receptive field of the simulated neuron's when
you do this in all the areas except in the medial eye
fields.
Then what you do is you actually present the visual target there
OK?
And lastly you present two visual targets
and you electrically stimulate to see
how it biases your choice as a result of this
in most cases sub-threshold electrical stimulation.
So if you do that what you find is, first of all,
if you do this experiment with a intact monkey
without stimulation you find say a receptive field here
and then you simply see what the monkey's choices are left
to the right and what you plot here
is the saccades made to the target in the receptive field
and what you can see is what I've shown you
before namely when the targets are simultaneous then
the monkey chooses left or right with equal probability.
Now we're going to add the electrical stimulation
and ask the question can we shift the curve to the left?
If you shift it to the left, that
means that the electrical stimulation facilitated
the choice and if you shift to the right it means that it
caused interference, it lessened the chances
of the monkey making a saccade into that area,
meaning the stimulation created inhibition.
Got it?
All right, so here's an example in the lower
layers of V1 remember in layer six of area
V1 is where you have your complex cells that project down
to the superior colliculus.
So here if you stimulate at sub-threshold levels and some
of these are very low levels only 7 1/2 and 10 microamps.
OK, really very, very fine currents
using themselves going to elicit an eye movement.
So if you do that the stimulation created
a significant, highly significant facilitatory
affect.
This is in the lower layers.
Now if you do the same experiment in the upper layers
you get the opposite effect we get a gigantic even-- look
at this five and 10 microamps, --even at that low, incredibly
low level you get a gigantic interference effect.
So that says that there's a complex interplay in V1
in the decision process that arises
as to whether you're going to look at a target,
or whether you're not going to look at a target.
Now we can do the same experiment in LIP
and in some regions you get this huge facilitatory effect
and in other regions you get an inhibitory effect,
so that's LIP.
So therefore this structure also plays a significant role
in deciding whether to look at or not
to look at a visual stimulus and here it
shows that in LIP as you increase the current
you get a gigantic increase in the latency
in these inhibitory areas with which
a saccade can be generated indicating that LIP plays
an important role in whether you're
going to look at a target or whether you're not
going to look at target.
OK and then if you do the frontal eye fields
everywhere in the frontal eye fields
you get a huge facilitatory effect
and in the medial eye fields you also get a facilitatory effect
as long as the motor field is where
the visual target appears.
But now you can remember what I told you about the medial eye
fields the fact is that they have a place code.
So one can do a different experiment
in which instead of presenting the target in the motor field
you can present the fixation spot there.
So here again to remind you, we have this place code.
So now we do this experiment, just
like what I've shown you before just to repeat it,
in this case the target appears and that causes a facilitation
in this case we put the fixation spot in there
and the location of the target's just displaced
and when you do that you get a huge inhibitory
effect because somehow the electrical stimulation forces
the animal keep the eye at the location where the motor
field is in the medial eye fields
and this is a very important point
and it means that the medial eye fields plays a significant role
in deciding how long to look at a target
before making the next saccade.
OK so now we going to, there's a lot of facts, so
and you're going to get some more lot of facts.
So now I'm going to summarize what I told you
about the effects of sub-threshold electrical
stimulation OK?
If you stimulate in the upper layers of V1 and V2,
V2 I should add to this you get interference,
in the lower layers you get facilitation in V4 there was
no effect I didn't talk about that before in LIP you can get
both facilitation interference and also fixation increase.
In the frontal eye fields you get facilitation
and the medial eye fields depending
on how you set it up you can get facilitation
if the target appears in the motor field
and you get inhibition when it appear,
when the fixation spot appears in it.
So that's the basic summary of these effects.
Now what these findings indicate that somehow
inhibitory circuits are essential in our ability
to make saccades to selected visual targets
and therefore what we want to do is
to examine what happens when you use
various kinds of pharmacological agents
that either facilitate or increase inhibition.
So to explain that then let me first of all point out to you
that if you take again the whole brain
and you look at the colliculus and you look at V1,
you look at LIP, you look at the frontal eye fields
you can study these areas by injecting
two kinds of pharmacological agents,
bicuculline and muscimol some people believe
you've heard of this as muscimol I call it muscimol.
At any rate you all know I'm sure
but this is bicuculline is a GABA antagonist meaning
that if you inject it OK, it stops
the effectiveness of inhibition by GABA.
Muscimol on the other hand is a GABA agonist
meaning that if you inject it you
increase inhibition all right?
Now I'm sure that all of you must
have had enough of a background in biochemistry
to know what these two agents are.
So now what we can do is we can inject
either one or the other of these agents and assess two things.
First off we assess eye movements
and secondly we also have to obviously assess
how it affects your visual ability.
So let's move on and do this.
The first set of experiments done with this
was by Hikosaka and Woods many years ago in the colliculus.
So what they did, very clever beautiful experiment,
is that they would put a microelectrode
into the colliculus and then initially just stimulate
to see what kind of eye movement you get and then they
would inject either muscimol or what's the other agent?
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: Very good and see what happens.
Now which of those causes more inhibition?
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]
PROFESSOR: OK, so let's look at that then.
If you electrically stimulate just like I've shown you
before you get a constant vector saccade no matter
where the eye starts you get the same vector.
Now the question is what happens to the spontaneous eye
movements of the monkey when you first inject muscimol OK?
Which is an agent that mimics if you will your GABA,
meaning it increases inhibition and what happens
is that the monkey hardly ever makes a saccade
with the vectors represented by the area that
has been injected.
By contrast if you inject bicuculline
the monkey keeps making saccades with that vector even when
there's nothing out there like the release of area
for inhibition.
And the signal is sent down to the brain step move your eye,
move your eye, move your eye, move your eye,
that's what happens.
So to show this in more detail then
we can ask what happens when you use two behavioral tasks OK,
the so-called paired target task that we already
talked about quite a bit and you talk
about a visual discrimination task
and that one is that you're already
familiar with the so-called audited task you present
several stimuli one of which is different from the others.
All right so here is an example of the paired target task.
What we do here again we vary the temporal asynchrony
between the two targets just like what
I've shown with the electrical stimulation
and this is the monkey's normal behavior when the two
targets are simultaneous the monkey chooses each randomly.
Now let's ask the question what happens is again to remind you,
if it goes this way the curve goes this way it's facilitation
if the current curve goes that way we get interference.
So let's ask what happens first of all, no let me also tell you
about the oddity task just to make sure that you have it.
All right that's the oddity task you know that already.
All right so we can now go on and first examine
what happens with muscimol or muscimol
or whatever you prefer to use OK?
Well again what, what does this agent do?
Does it do excitation or inhibition?
AUDIENCE: Inhibition.
PROFESSOR: Very good, inhibition because it mimics GABA
all right?
So let's look at what happens.
Here we have a normal monkey same experiment
as before, here is the this is V1,
here's a receptive field you present one visual target
there, the other there, then you vary the temporary asynchrony
between them, this is what happens in the normal case OK?
Now you're going to inject the muscimol
and ask yourself the question, we
increased inhibition what do you think is going to happen?
Well it should be pretty obvious,
what happens is you get gigantic inhibition
the monkey practically never looks
at here because that area is not being activated
by the visual stimulus because of the inhibition.
Then if you do this over time, even four hours later there's
a huge, huge effect but by the next day
the monkey recovers luckily so one can do this experiment
several times because this agent is something
that washes out of the brain.
All right so now let's look at what
happens in the frontal eye fields.
Same experiment, all right, just a different location
with the electrode.
And what you get, this is your preinjection.
And once again, after the injection,
you get a big interference effect
which recovers by the next day.
So that is what you get that with that.
Then let's examine what happens in LIP.
Curiously in LIP there was no effect.
All right.
So now let's next turn to the so-called oddity task meaning
several stimuli, one of which is different from the others
and what is the monkey's ability to choose
the different stimulus.
So if you do this with a muscimol injection
there's a huge deficit for V1 that you
would expect because it destroyed the monkey's ability
to analyze the visual stimulus that
appeared in the receptive field.
Then if you do the same thing in the frontal eye fields
you find a mild deficit and then if you do the same thing in LIP
you get no deficit at all.
So this is what then happens with the oddities task
and now what you can do is ask what happens when instead
of muscimol we're going to inject bicuculline?
And we're going to go through the same procedure
as what I just shown you and so we start here in V1
and when you do that think about it for a minute,
now you're facilitating supposedly
because you're eliminating inhibition
what do you think you would get?
Well, you'll be in for a surprise, what
you get is gigantic interference again
because putting bicuculline in also screwed up you're
ability in the visual cortex to analyze the visual percept.
This again recovers over time by the next day
it's back to normal.
Then if you do the same experiment in the frontal eye
fields what do you think's going to happen?
Can you predict what's going to happen just
looking at this slide?
Why do you think this is such a big empty space here huh?
OK well look at that, when you put in bicuculline we
get this incredible facilitation.
OK the monkey just like in the colliculus
barely can help himself to make a saccade into the field
that has been disinhibited OK?, and that again recovers,
bicuculline is washed out more rapidly
than muscimol and by the next day
certainly is back to normal.
Now we can do the same thing just looking
at the eye movements themselves to further highlight
what I've shown you before.
If you'd put bicuculline in OK, in the frontal eye fields
the monkey cannot help but make saccades with similar vectors
that are represented by the neurons in the injected site
and that's why you have all this is its full stack of saccades
buh, buh, buh, buh, bang the monkey just can't help
but makes saccades because the signal to make the saccade has
been disinhibited.
All right so then you can ask what happens in LIP
and when you do that you get no effect at all,
and if you do now the bicuculline injection
with the oddities task we can once again
ask well what happens with that?
And then once again as I've already indicated,
both bicuculline and muscimol cause a major interference
in your ability to select the odd target,
in other words to visually discriminate,
but if you do the same thing in the frontal eye fields
and in the medial and LIP you get no effect at all.
So what this then says to summarize all right
is the following.
We talk about target selection, which was a two target
task, individual discrimination which was the oddities task
and here we have muscimol and here bicuculline.
So if you do that in the frontal eye field, in V1 first,
you get interference, you do it in the frontal eye
fields you get interference of muscimol
with great facilitation, with bicuculline
and LIP has no effec.
And then, just to remind you, it has already
been shown by Hikosaka and Woods,
that you get interference of facilitation
in the superior colliculus with these two agents.
You do the same thing with visual discrimination,
you get a major deficit in V1 for both
and you get a mild effect for both actually no effect
really with bicuculline in the frontal eye
fields and no effect at all in LIP.
So these manipulations then gives you
sort of a sense of what these various areas do
in the generation of eye movements
that involve not only just to make a saccade to a target
but to select targets individual field, make a decision as
to where to look, and also to decide when to look,
because any time you make an eye movement
and I should've mentioned that more thoroughly before, you
look at something and how long you look at it
depends on how long it takes you to analyze what you're looking
at.
Now in most cases it takes you maybe I
don't know 200 milliseconds or less to say,
oh yeah that's letter a or whatever
and then you say it's your brain mechanisms tell you, OK, now
you know what it is.
It's OK for you to move your eye.
OK so that's involved and then thirdly,
you have an important task in making sequences
of eye movements so that when you
look at a picture like the movie I showed you in the beginning
in the previous lecture, when you look at something
then you make a decision as to where to look next,
where to look next and if you keep doing this
for I don't know 20, 30 saccades then you get to a state
where you say oh now I understand
the picture as a whole.
All right so now we're going to summarize
what the tasks are in a very simple situation
and what brain structures are involved in it.
First of all let's imagine that you're
looking at fixation spot designated by a.
Let's assume the two stimuli come on
and that means that you have to make a decision as
to what those two targets are, you
have to identify them because you have to select one of those
OK?
Of course in most cases you're talking about many targets that
are out there this is a highly simplified version.
The next step is to decide which of these two
targets now that I know one says a and the other says b, which
of those two targets, actually b and c in the picture here
which of these targets should I look at,
and so you make a decision all right, that generates
excitation and inhibitin, inhibition through excitatory
and inhibitory circuits, and then you
decide OK we going to look here and that
means that you have to decide which one not to look
at in addition to deciding which one to look at,
because you've got to make an accurate saccade so you
don't want a vector average.
All right.
And then what you need of course is a map,
if you will, of the motor field so that you can generate
the appropriate direction of the saccade
so that you can decide where you're going to look at
and then lastly as I've mentioned already before,
you also have to make a decision as
to when to make that eye movement.
So now in a very summary fashion we
can talk about the various brain areas involved.
Quite a number of different areas
are involved in the decision as to what these two stimuli are,
they of course involve much of the visual system including
also LIP and several other areas.
Then, then you have to make a decision as
to which one to look at, again several areas involve notably
among them are the frontal eye fields, LIP, and also
the medial eye fields.
Then you also have to decide which ones not to look at,
that it was largely the same areas
and then you need of course a topographic arrangement
to know where things are and that you
can find in many areas, including V1, V2,
the frontal eye fields, and the colliculi which are laid out
in a nice topographic fashion, and then
lastly LIP is important for that,
and I think to some degree also the medial eye fields
but I'm not sure about that to decide when you should generate
saccadic eye movements.
Well that's very nice and makes you
realize that even though we never
think about making eye movement all this stuff is going
on three times a second it's amazing.
So now you're going to look at what the various visual areas
and ocular motor areas are that play a role in this OK,
and so we're going to create a summary diagram.
So here we have, that's the first one
I shown you, which has a rate code that from the brain stem
connects with the eye muscles and activates them.
Then we have the superior colliculus,
now the superior colliculus is under strong inhibitory control
all right, and they're several inhibitory circuits that
are involved in that and those include the substantia nigra
that sends inhibitory circuits down
to the colliculus that then prevents the colliculus
from generating an eye movement because it
is under inhibition, because every time you
look around thousands and thousands
of impressions impinge on the colliculus
and you only want one of those to actually get down
to the deep place, the colliculus,
to generate an eye movement.
Now then the substantia nigra is under the control
of several neural structures which, many of which
go through this so-called basal ganglia.
Now we can expand on this and look at the visual input
to do this.
We already talked about this a lot
you, pointed out to you that you have these three
major, many, many different types of ganglion cells.
The three major ones we talked about
are the midget parasol and the so-called W-cells
that go to the cortex.
And the W-cells also project directly to the colliculus.
Then from layer five in the visual cortex
you have the cells that project to the superior colliculus
and the intermediate layers and that down flow is controlled
predominantly by the parasol system as we had described.
Then we have all these other areas
that V1 projects to, V2, MT, V4, and so on some of them
dominated by input from the parasol system
and others get input from both, and those
in turn project to the parietal and temporal lobes
and those in turn have an important influence
on the inhibitory circuits through the basal ganglia
and the substantia nigra.
Now let me finally come to the frontal lobe, the frontal eye
fields, and the medial eye fields and they in turn
have direct access to the brain stem
and also connect to the superior colliculus.
Now this is still not the whole story
because what you have in addition is
a bunch of interconnections among numerous cortical areas
they talk back and forth to each other
that enables you to make these decisions as
to where to look next.
Now if you think this is complete
you're still wrong because now what you have to realize
is that all this circuitry is also
one that receives input from several other areas,
with the auditory system that you're
going to hear a lot about later on in the course,
the somatosensory system, the olfactory system,
the smooth pursuit system that we'll mention
a little bit next time, the vestibular
system, the accessory optic system we'll
talk about next time, and the vergence system.
So all these fit into this incredibly complex circuitry
already and essential elements in your ability
to move your eyes about.
So I think you need to realize therefore that something even
as simple as just moving your eyes about it's an incredibly
complicated system involving many structures
and involving excitatory and inhibitory circuits,
interconnections it's just, it's almost dumbfounding.
So that then is the essence of these connections,
and what I want turn to next I think
we still have a little time.
Before I summarize our results for today,
I want to say something about dreaming and rapid eye
movements.
I think all of you know that every night you sleep you dream
and what you also know that has been discovered more
recently is when you dream you make rapid eye movement so it's
called REM sleep, and so the question arose why do we dream?
Why do we have REM sleep?
Now, the major influence as to why we dream
comes from the work of Sigmund Freud who
published a famous book one of his really great works called,
The Interpretation Of Dreams, which
was the original version in German was published in 1900.
OK so 113 years ago.
Now this was an incredibly influential book and also
central for the emergence of psychoanalysis
and has been used extensively to interpret quotes why we dream.
Now the prime, in very summary fashion,
the prime idea that Freud expressed
is that dreaming is equivalent to wish-fulling your dreams,
your wishes, to fulfilling your wishes.
So that's why it's called wish fulfillment dreams.
Now, that's interesting because one of the stories he has
in that book of his, Interpretation Of Dreams,
is a woman he was psychoanalyzing who one day
when she came to be, to her session said you know you told
me the other day that dreams are wish fulfillment's.
She said, I don't believe that, I had a dream last night
and it didn't go along with wish fulfillment and Freud said,
I want you to tell me what the dream was about.
Well, my dream was that I went to a store
to buy some food because I was going to have a dinner party
and when I got to the store it was closed and I could,
as much as I wanted to I couldn't
buy the food for the dinner.
Freud scratched his eyes, you know I'm making that up,
and he said that's true, he said you know what?
You didn't want to give a dinner party
that's why you dreamt that.
So that's famous psychoanalytic stuff.
You can always twist things around so
that it fits with your hypotheses,
in this case Freud felt that indeed even though she had
this, what she thought was a contrary dream it was a wish
fulfillment dream.
Well that's one part of dreaming,
what the other part that Freud had emphasized
is that when we dream so many of our wishes
are actually unacceptable to ourselves
and therefore we dream it at night
and so he constructed in many other studies
the idea that in humans we have three subdivisions of the mind.
We have the Id, the ego and the super ego,
you all know that right?
So what it means that when you dream at night some
of the wishes that you, unacceptable
wishes that aren't in your Id, kind
of seep through because the super ego
is not under control since you're asleep.
So that was his basic idea and of course it
was then many years later discovered that whenever
you dream you make all kinds of eye movements.
You don't make eye movements when you don't dream
but when you dream you make eye movements.
Now one of the problems with the Freudian theory
is that animals also dream and in fact most dramatically,
animals that hibernate do a lot of dreaming and not
only dreaming but those animals also
move their eyes about a lot OK?
So that observation then kind of shifted
the notion as to why we have REM sleep
and so people thought about that and one observation that
had been made is that when you eliminate a persons
ability to move the eyes, such as you lose somehow the ability
to activate your eye muscles, this
can be done also in monkeys.
What happens in fairly short order
is it your eye becomes ill-affected
and what I mean by that is that the eye loses
it's perfect roundness to some degree
and more notably even what happens
is that your cornea becomes uneven,
becomes ridged, because you're not moving your eye.
So that discovery then has led to an alternate theory
about why we dream which is not nearly as
romantic or intriguing as Freudian theory,
namely that we have REM sleep at night in order--
and especially have it in animals that hibernate--
in order to keep the eyes in healthy condition
and to keep the cornea nice and smooth and even
because if you were not to dream at all
and you would sleep eight or 10 hours.
Then you would have an uneven, would
result in having an uneven cornea that
would make it more difficult for you to see
and the reason for this then is that animals
that, which presumably don't have Ids, egos, and super egos
also dream as do animals that hibernate
and so there's a necessity to move your eyes while you
are sleeping or hibernating.
So that's an alternate theory and we'll
see one of these years whether they're correct
but I can tell you, which may not
be very nice, that basically Freudian theory has taken quite
a nose dive and in fact today psychoanalysis has become
largely dead for a number of reasons,
and so you don't have too many psychiatrists or psychoanalysts
out there performing those psychoanalytic tasks that they
had, in which a patient lies down
on a couch and sort of free associates
and sometimes even gets hypnotized to talk about some
of his unconscious wishes and so on.
So anyway that's the story for today
and that brings me to an end to eye movement control.
I hope you'll appreciate the fact
that even a simple system like eye movements
is unbelievably complex when it comes
to the brain controlling it.
Next time we're going to talk about eye movements
and towards the end of that I'll come back a little bit
and talk more about yet another aspect of eye movement control.
Does anybody have any questions?
Yes please.
AUDIENCE: Can you just explain again
quickly why the bicuculline injection in V1
causes interference?
PROFESSOR: OK, that's a very good question.
Why does bicuculline in the, in V1 cause interference?
Because it screws up the neurons ability
to analyze the visual scene.
You mess up the centers around antagonism,
you mess up the orientation selectivity of these cells,
or direction selectivity of them,
so they're no longer able to analyze the visual scene
in the normal fashion.
Yeah that's, and, it certainly you see,
the V1 is quite far removed really
from the generation of a motor response.
If you inject GABA inhibitors into areas
which are closely linked to the execution of motor acts
then the, the effect is seen because you generate a motor
response or if it's muscimol then you inhibit the motor
response but the frontal, you see this in the frontal eye
fields but you don't see this in V1
because V1 is predominantly the system that
analyzes visual percepts, as are V2 and V4 and all
those other higher cortical visual areas.
Any further questions?
All right very good so I will see you then next Monday
and I think you'll find that we'll
have an interesting session.
We're going talk about movement and we're not going talk
about regular movement, we're also
going to talk about confusing kinds of movements,
like especially very important apparent motion.
You realize and just to say one more word here,
that nowadays when you go home and watch television almost all
the motion that you see on the TV
is apparent motion, not real motion
and I-- keep thinking about that--
and I'll tell you about that next time.
AUDIENCE: Monday is actually a Holiday.
PROFESSOR: Oh, yeah.
Sorry it's not Monday.
It's our next session is next Wednesday.
Sorry about that.