Neural processing of gravito-inertial cues in humans. IV. Influence of visual rotational cues during roll optokinetic stimuli

Journal of Neurophysiology

Volumn 89, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 390-400

  Zupan, L H ^a   Merfeld, D M ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCELERATION; ADULT; AFTERNYSTAGMUS; ARTICLE; AUDITORY ORIENTATION; CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM; CONTROLLED STUDY; EYE MOVEMENT; FEMALE; GAZE; GRAVITY; HEAD TILTING; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; NYSTAGMUS; OPTOKINETIC STIMULATION; OTOLITH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; ROTATION; SEMICIRCULAR CANAL; SENSORY SYSTEM ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; SPATIAL ORIENTATION; VESTIBULAR SYSTEM; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL ORIENTATION; VISUAL SYSTEM;

EID: 0037252908     PISSN: 00223077     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1152/jn.00513.2001     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Angelaki D. and Hess B. Inertial representation of angular motion in the vestibular system of rhesus monkeys. 1. Vestibuloocular reflex. J Neurophysiol 71: 1222-1249, 1994.
2. Angelaki D, McHenry M, Dickman J, Newlands S, and Hess, B. Computation of inertial motion: neural strategies to resolve ambiguous otolith information. J Neurosci 19: 316-327, 1999.
3. Angelaki DE, Wei M, and Merfeld DM. Vestibular discrimination of gravity and translational acceleration. Ann NY Acad Sci 942: 114-127, 2001.
4. Bell C, Bodznick D, Montgomery J, and Bastian J. The generation and subtraction of sensory expectations within cerebellum-like structures. Brain Behav Evol 50(1 Suppl.): 17-31, 1997.
5. Bhushan N. and Shadmehr R. Computational nature of human adaptive control during learning of reaching movements in force fields. Biol Cybern 81: 39-60, 1999.
6. Brandt T, Wist E, and Dichgans J. Foreground and background in dynamic spatial orientation. Percept Psychophys 17: 497-503, 1975.
7. Cheung BS. and Howard IP. Optokinetic torsion: dynamics and relation to circularvection. Vision Res 31: 1327-1335, 1991.
8. Cohen B, Wearne S, Dai M. and Raphan T. Spatial orientation of the angular vestibulo-ocular reflex. J Vestib Res 9: 163-172, 1999.
9. Collewijn H, Van der Steen J, Ferman L, and Jansen T. Human ocular counterroll: assessment of static and dynamic properties from electromagnetic scleral coil recordings. Exp Brain Res 59: 185-196, 1985.
10. Dai M, Raphan T, and Cohen B. Spatial orientation of the vestibular system: dependence on optokinetic after-nystagmus on gravity. J Neurophysiol 66: 1422-1439, 1991.
11. Darlot C, Zupan L, Etard O, Denise P, and Maruani A. Computation of inverse dynamics for the control of movements. Biol Cybern 75: 173-186, 1996.
12. Dichgans J, Held R, Young LR, and Brandt T. Moving visual scenes influence the apparent direction of gravity. Science 178: 1217-1219, 1972.
13. Droulez J and Cornilleau-Pérès V. Application of the coherence scheme to the multisensory fusion problem. In: Multisensory Control of Movement, edited by A. Berthoz. Oxford, UK: Oxford, 1993, p. 485-501.
14. Droulez J. and Darlot C. The geometric and dynamic implications of the coherence constraints in three-dimensional sensorimotor interactions. In: Attention and Performance XIII, edited by M. Jeannerod. New York: Erlbaum, 1989, p. 495-526.
15. Fetter M, Heimberger J, Black R, Hermann W, Sievering F, and Dichgans J. Otolith-semicircular canal interaction during postrotatory nystagmus in humans. Exp Brain Res 108: 463-472, 1996.
16. Fetter M, Tweed D, Hermann W, Wohland-Braun B, and Koenig E. The influence of head position and head reorientation on the axis of eye rotation and the vestibular time constant during postrotatory nystagmus. Exp Brain Res 91: 121-128, 1992.
17. Furman JM and Koizuka I. Reorientation of poststimulus nystagmus in tilted humans. J Vestib Res 4: 421-428, 1994.
18. Gizzi M, Raphan T, Rudolph S, and Cohen B. Orientation of human optokinetic nystagmus to gravity: a model-based approach. Exp Brain Res 99: 347-360, 1994.
19. Glasauer S. Interaction of semicircular canals and otoliths in the processing structure of the subjective zenith. Ann NY Acad Sci 656: 847-849, 1992.
20. Guedry F. Psychophysics of vestibular sensation. In: Handbook of Sensory Physiology, edited by H. Kornhuber. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1974, p. 1-154.
21. Harris L and Barnes G. Orientation of vestibular nystagmus is modified by head tilt. In: The Vestibular System: Neurophysiologic and Clinical Research, edited by M. Graham and J. Kemink. New York: Raven Press, 1987, p. 539-548.
22. Held R, Dichgans J, and Bauer J. Characteristics of moving visual scenes influencing spatial orientation. Vision Res 15: 357-365, 1975.
23. Hess BJ and Angelaki DE. Oculomotor control of primary eye position discriminates between translation and tilt. J Neurophysiol 81: 394-398, 1999.
24. Howard I and Childerson L. The contribution of motion, the visual frame, and visual polarity to sensations of body tilt. Perception 23: 753-762, 1994.
25. Jackson D. Characterization of the Torsional Optokinetic Response to Rolling Visual Fields in Humans. (MS thesis), Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1992.
26. Jaggi-Schwarz K, Misslisch H, and Hess BJ. Canal-otolith interactions after off-vertical axis rotations I. Spatial reorientation of horizontal vestibuloocular reflex. J Neurophysiol 83: 1522-1535, 2000.
27. Kuo A. An optimal control model for analyzing human postural balance. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 42; 87-101, 1995.
28. Lehmann EL and D'Abrera HJM. Nonparametrics: Statistical Methods Based on Ranks (rev. ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1998, p. 292, 300, and 323.
29. Lewald J and Ehrenstein W. Influence of head-to-trunk position on sound lateralization. Exp Brain Res 121: 230-238, 1998.
30. Mayne R. A systems concept of the vestibular organs. In: Handbook of Sensory Physiology, Vol. VI. Vestibular System, Part 2. Psychophysics, Applied Aspects and General Interpretations, edited by H. Kornhuber. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1974, p. 493-580.
31. Merfeld D, Teiwes W, Clarke A, Scherer H, and Young L. The dynamic contributions of the otolith organs to human ocular torsion. Exp Brain Res 110: 315-321, 1996.
32. Merfeld D and Young L. Three dimensional eye velocity measurement following postrotational tilts in monkeys. Ann NY Acad Sci 656: 783-794, 1992.
33. Merfeld DM, Young L, Oman C, and Shelhamer M. A multi-dimensional model of the effect of gravity on the spatial orientation of the monkey. J Vestib Res 3: 141-161, 1993a.
34. Merfeld DM, Young L, Paige G, and Tomko D. Three dimensional eye movements of squirrel monkeys following post-rotatory tilt. J Vestib Res 3: 123-139, 1993b.
35. Merfeld DM and Young LR. The vestibulo-ocular reflex of the squirrel monkey during eccentric rotation and roll tilt. Exp Brain Res 106: 111-122, 1995.
36. Merfeld DM, Zupan L, and Peterka RJ. Humans use an internal model to separate gravity and linear acceleration. Nature 398: 615-618, 1999.
37. Merfeld DM and Zupan LH. Neural processing of gravito-inertial cues in humans. III. Modeling tilt and translation responses. J Neurophysiol 87: 819-833, 2001.
38. Merfeld DM and Zupan LH. Influence of rotational cues on the neural processing of gravito-inertial force. In Levels of Perception, edited by L. R. Harris and M. Jenkin. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2002, p. 345-378.
39. Merfeld DM, Zupan LH, and Gifford CA. Neural processing of gravitoinertial cues in humans. II. Influence of the semicircular canals during eccentric rotation. J Neurophysiol 85: 1648-1660, 2001.
40. Morrow M and Sharpe J. Torsional optokinetic nystagmus in upright and supine positions in humans. ARVO Abstr 30: 51, 1989.
41. Murasugi C and Howard I. Human horizontal optokinetic nystagmus elicited by the upper versus the lower visual fields. Visual Neurosci 2: 73-79, 1989.
42. Muratore R and Zee DS. Pursuit after-nystagmus. Vision Res 19: 1057-1059, 1979.
43. Mussa-Ivaldi FA. Modular features of motor control and learning. Curr Opin Neurobiol 9: 713-717, 1999.
44. Niven J, Hixson W, and Correia M. Elicitation of horizontal nystagmus by periodic linear acceleration. Acta Otolaryngol 62: 429-441, 1966.
45. Ohmi M, Howard I, and Landolt J. Circular vection as a function of foreground-background relationships. Perception 16: 17-22, 1987.
46. Oman CM. A heuristic mathematical model for the dynamics of sensory conflict and motion sickness. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 392: 1-44, 1982.
47. Paige G and Tomko D. Eye movement responses to linear head motion in the squirrel monkey. I. Basic characteristics. J Neurophysiol 65: 1170-1182, 1991.
48. Paulin M. The role of the cerebellum in motor control and perception. Brain Behav Evol 41: 39-50, 1993.
49. Rao R and Ballard D. Dynamic model of visual recognition predicts neural response properties in the visual cortex. Neural Computation 9: 721-763, 1997.
50. Raphan T and Cohen B. Organizational principles of velocity storage in three dimensions: the effect of gravity on cross-coupling of optokinetic afternystagmus. Ann NY Acad Sci 545: 74-92, 1988.
51. Schwarz C, Busettini C, and Miles F. Ocular responses to linear motion are inversely proportional to viewing distance. Science 245: 1394-1396, 1989.
52. Schwarz C and Miles F. Ocular responses to translation and their dependence on viewing distance. I. Motion of the observer. J Neurophysiol 66: 851-864, 1991.
53. Simpson JI. The accessory optic system. Annu Rev Neurosci 7: 13-42, 1984.
54. Wade S and Curthoys I. The effect of ocular torsional position on perception of the roll-tilt of visual stimuli. Vision Res. 37: 1071-1078, 1997.
55. Wall III C, Merfeld DM, and Zupan L. Effects of static orientation upon human optokinetic afternystagmus. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 114: 353-359, 1999.
56. Wearne S, Raphan T, and Cohen B. Effects of tilt of the gravito-inertial acceleration vector on the angular vestibuloocular reflex during centrifugation. J Neurophysiol 81: 2175-2190, 1999.
57. Wei G, Lafortune S, Ireland D, and Jell R. Human vertical optokinetic nystagmus and after-response, and their dependence upon head orientation with respect to gravity. J Vestib Res 4: 37-47, 1994.
58. Wilson V and Melvill Jones G. Mammalian Vestibular Physiology. New York: Plenum, 1979.
59. Wolpert D, Ghahramani Z, and Jordan M. An internal model for sensorimotor integration. Science 269: 1880-1882, 1995.
60. Yasui S and Young L. Perceived visual motion as effective stimulus to pursuit eye movement system. Science 190: 906-908, 1975.
61. Young L. Perception of the body in space: mechanisms. In: Handbook of Physiology. The Nervous System, edited by I. Darian-Smith. Bethesda, MD: Am. Physiol. Soc., 1984, chapt. 22, p. 1023-1066.
62. Young LR and Meiry JL. A revised dynamic otolith model. In: Third Symposium on the Role of the Vestibular Organs in Space Exploration, edited by A. Graybiel. Pensacola, FL: NASA, 1967, p. 363-368. (Publ. NASA SP-152:363-368).
63. Zupan LH. Modelization of the Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex (VOR) and Motion Sickness Prediction (PhD thesis). Paris: Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Télécommunications, 1995.
64. Zupan LH, Merfeld DM, and Darlot C. Using sensory weighting to model the influence of canal, otolith and visual cues on spatial orientation and eye movements. Biol Cybern 86: 209-230, 2002.
65. Zupan LH, Peterka RJ, and Merfeld DM. Neural processing of gravito-inertial cues in humans. I. Influence of the semicircular canals following post-rotatory tilt. J Neurophysiol 84: 2001-2015, 2000.