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


     


J Neurophysiol (January 23, 2008). doi:10.1152/jn.00119.2007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
99/4/1857    most recent
00119.2007v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yang, S.-n.
Right arrow Articles by Missal, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Yang, S.-n.
Right arrow Articles by Missal, M.
Submitted on February 2, 2007
Accepted on January 23, 2008

The effects of microstimulation of the dorsomedial frontal cortex on saccade latency

Shun-nan Yang1, Stephen J Heinen2*, and Marcus Missal3

1 Smith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute, San Francisco, California, United States
2 Smith-Kettlewell Eye Res Inst, San Francisco, California, United States; Smith-Kettlewell Eye Res Inst, United States
3 Laboratoire de Neurophysiologie, Universite Catholique de Louvain, Brussels; Laboratoire de Neurophysiologie, UCL 5449, 5449 avenue Hippocrate, Bruxelles, 1200, Belgium

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: heinen{at}ski.org.

Neural regions in the dorsomedial frontal cortex (DMFC), including the supplementary eye field (SEF) and the pre-supplementary motor area (pre-SMA), are likely candidates for generating top-down control of saccade target selection. To investigate this, we applied electrical microstimulation to these structures while saccades were being planned to visual targets. Stimulation administered to superficial and lateral DMFC sites that were within or close to the SEF delayed ipsilateral and facilitated contralateral saccades. Facilitation was limited to saccades made toward targets in a narrow, contralateral movement field that had endpoints consistent with the goal of evoked saccades. Facilitation occurred with current delivered before target onset, and delay with current applied after this time. Stimulation at deeper, medial sites that encompassed the pre-SMA resulted in mostly bilateral delay. The amount of delay at these sites was usually greater for ipsilateral saccades and increased with current amplitude. Changes in saccade latency were not accompanied by altered endpoint, trajectory or peak velocity. The spatial specificity of SEF stimulation in inducing latency changes suggests that the SEF participates in selecting saccade goals. The less specific delay with pre-SMA stimulation suggests that it is involved in postponing visually-guided saccades, which likely permits other oculomotor structures to select saccade goals.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2008 by the The American Physiological Society.