JN Miami Valley Hospital
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol 76: 1133-1144, 1996;
0022-3077/96 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vercher, J. L.
Right arrow Articles by Lamarre, Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vercher, J. L.
Right arrow Articles by Lamarre, Y.

Journal of Neurophysiology, Vol 76, Issue 2 1133-1144, Copyright © 1996 by APS


ARTICLES

Self-moved target eye tracking in control and deafferented subjects: roles of arm motor command and proprioception in arm-eye coordination

J. L. Vercher, G. M. Gauthier, O. Guedon, J. Blouin, J. Cole and Y. Lamarre
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Faculte des Sciences du Sport, Universite de la Mediterranee, Marseille, France.

1. When a visual target is moved by the subject's hand (self-moved target tracking), smooth pursuit (SP) characteristics differ from eye-alone tracking: SP latency is shorter and maximal eye velocity is higher in self-moved target tracking than in eye-alone tracking. The aim of this study was to determine which signals (motor command and/or proprioception) generated during arm motion are responsible for the decreased time interval between arm and eye motion onsets in self-moved target tracking. 2. Six control subjects tracked a visual target whose motion was generated by active or passive movements of the observer's arm in order to determine the role played by arm proprioception in the arm-eye coordination. In a second experiment, the participation of two subjects suffering complete loss of proprioception allowed us to assess the contribution of arm motor command signals. 3. In control subjects, passive movement of the arm led to eye latencies significantly longer (130 ms) than when the arm was actively self-moved (-5 ms:negative values meaning that the eyes actually started to move before the target) but slightly shorter than in eye-alone tracking (150 ms). These observations indicate that active movement of the arm is necessary to trigger short-latency SP of self-moved targets. 4. Despite the lack of proprioceptive information about arm motion, the two deafferented subjects produced early SP (-8 ms on average) when they actively moved their arms. In this respect they did not differ from control subjects. Active control of the arm is thus sufficient to trigger short-latency SP. However, in contrast with control subjects, in deafferented subjects SP gain declined with increasing target motion frequency more rapidly in self-moved target tracking than in eye-alone tracking. 5. The deafferented subjects also tracked a self-moved target while the relationship between arm and target motions was altered either by introducing a delay between arm motion and target motion or by reversing target motion relative to arm motion. As with control subjects, delayed target motion did not affect SP latency. Furthermore, the deafferented subjects adapted to the reversed arm-target relationship faster than control subjects. 6. The results suggest that arm motor command is necessary for the eye-to-arm motion onset synchronization, because eye tracking of the passively moved arm was performed by control subjects with a latency comparable with that of eye-alone tracking of an external target. On the other hand, as evidenced by the data from the deafferented subjects, afferent information does not appear to be necessary for reducing the time between arm motion and SP onsets. However, afferent information appears to contribute to the parametric adjustment between arm motor command and visual information about arm motion.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
D. Thura, D. Boussaoud, and M. Meunier
Hand Position Affects Saccadic Reaction Times in Monkeys and Humans
J Neurophysiol, May 1, 2008; 99(5): 2194 - 2202.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
N. Malfait, D. Y. Henriques, and P. L. Gribble
Shape Distortion Produced by Isolated Mismatch Between Vision and Proprioception
J Neurophysiol, January 1, 2008; 99(1): 231 - 243.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
E. Guillaud, G. Gauthier, J.-L. Vercher, and J. Blouin
Fusion of Visuo-ocular and Vestibular Signals in Arm Motor Control
J Neurophysiol, February 1, 2006; 95(2): 1134 - 1146.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cereb CortexHome page
D. Balslev, F. A. Nielsen, O. B. Paulson, and I. Law
Right Temporoparietal Cortex Activation during Visuo-proprioceptive Conflict
Cereb Cortex, February 1, 2005; 15(2): 166 - 169.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurosci.Home page
G. Ariff, O. Donchin, T. Nanayakkara, and R. Shadmehr
A Real-Time State Predictor in Motor Control: Study of Saccadic Eye Movements during Unseen Reaching Movements
J. Neurosci., September 1, 2002; 22(17): 7721 - 7729.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
R. A. Weeks, C. Gerloff, M. Honda, M. C. Dalakas, and M. Hallett
Movement-Related Cerebellar Activation in the Absence of Sensory Input
J Neurophysiol, July 1, 1999; 82(1): 484 - 488.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online