Afferent signals from the extraocular muscles affect the gain of the horizontal vestibulo-ocular reflex in the alert pigeon

Visual vertigo: Vertigo of oculomotor origin

Since Róbert Bárány proposed his hypothesis on vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR), dizziness associated with vertigo has been interpreted as being vestibular in origin. However, there have been many contradictory findings showing modulations of VOR, which have caused confusion as to VOR's role and accuracy. Further, there seems to be an influence of VOR when the anatomical inner ear structures are congenitally absent. Many people report vertiginous symptoms when they are exposed to visually challenging situations. These people with visually induced vertigo are usually found to have only mildly abnormal labyrinthine findings. Accurate visual information via binocular vision in animals, including humans, is important for the survival. Understanding how visual information is used in balance can help us to apply a different approach to the mechanism of vertigo. This article will review how accurate binocular viewing is possible for precise images through a complex oculomotor system and the proprioceptive senses of the external ocular muscles (EOMs). The proprioceptive senses from EOMs appear to affect motor efferents of the body. Oculomotor activities during viewing are important not just for learning but also for executing whole body motor responses. An error in the oculomotor afferents will cause a reaction to the error signal. This can be troubling for proper balancing during movement. Especially, common oculomotor causes (including fatigue of EOMs which is common in today's lifestyle) can contribute to many vertiginous conditions.

Effect of tongue stimulation on nystagmus eye movements in blind patients

We have observed dramatic effects of tactile tongue stimulation on nystagmus eye movements in patients with acquired blindness, and we report these results. Six adult subjects (3 subjects with light perception or worse vision and 3 normal subjects) were included in this study. Causes of blindness included traumatic explosion, anterior ischemic optic neuropathy, and central retinal artery occlusion. Duration of blindness was 15, 3 and 1.5 years, respectively. A video eye tracking system (Eyelink 1000) was used to record eye movements. The eye movement recording (EMR) was repeated four times in a span of 20 min. Two of the EMRs were performed without tongue stimulation and two with tongue stimulation in randomized order. A tongue stimulus was applied to the surface of the tongue using a Brainport device that produces an electrical tactile stimulus. The nystagmus waveform characteristics and frequency were analyzed. We found that all blind subjects showed continuous jerk nystagmus with slow and quick phases, mainly in horizontal plane in their primary eye positions. The recorded nystagmus waveforms were jerk with linear velocity slow phases. When the tongue stimulus was applied, the frequency of nystagmus was significantly reduced by 47, 40, and 11%, and relative amplitude was reduced by 43, 45, and 6% for three blind subjects, respectively. In conclusion, we think our results that tongue stimulation influences nystagmus eye movements support a link between non-visual sensory input and ocular motor activity.

Hysteresis in the production of force by larval Dipteran muscle

We describe neuromuscular hysteresis – the dependence of muscle force on recent motoneuron activity – in the body wall muscles of larval Sarcophaga bullata and Drosophila melanogaster. In semi-intact preparations, isometric force produced by a train of nerve impulses at a constant rate was significantly less than that produced by the same train of stimuli with a brief (200 ms) high-frequency burst of impulses interspersed. Elevated force did not decay back to predicted values after the burst but instead remained high throughout the duration of the stimulus train. The increased force was not due to a change in excitatory junction potentials (EJPs); EJP voltage and time course before and after the high-frequency burst were not statistically different. Single muscle and semi-intact preparations exhibited hysteresis similarly, suggesting that connective tissues of the origin or insertion are not crucial to the mechanism of hysteresis. Hysteresis was greatest at low motoneuron rates – yielding a ~100% increase over predicted values based on constant-rate stimulation alone – and decreased as impulse rate increased. We modulated motoneuron frequency rhythmically across rates and cycle periods similar to those observed during kinematic analysis of larval crawling. Positive force hysteresis was also evident within these more physiological activation parameters.

Induced extraocular muscle afferent signals: from pigeons to people

While the muscles that move the eyes, the extraocular muscles (EOM), are well endowed with proprioceptors, afferent signals from these receptors are usually assumed to play little or no role in the control of eye movement. In a series of experiments, a suction contact lens was used to impose movements on one eye, thus inducing afferent signals. Single unit activity was recorded centrally (to examine the interactions between EOM afferent signals and visual or vestibular signals), or the movements of the other eye were measured (to investigate their effects on the output of the oculomotor system). In a model preparation, the decerebrate pigeon, EOM afferent signals modified single unit activity in the medial vestibular nucleus, and the third and sixth motor nuclei, during sinusoidal vestibular stimulation. When one eye was moved to mimic the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR), movement faster than required for compensation for a given head velocity reduced the gain of single unit vestibular responses. In awake, alert pigeons the overall output of the VOR, as evidenced by movements of the other eye, was modified. In humans, when one eye was impeded, the saccades and smooth pursuit executed by the other eye were altered. Taken together, these results suggest that EOM afferent signals play a functional role in the shaping of eye movement.

The neuroanatomical basis of oculomotor disorders: the dual motor control of extraocular muscles and its possible role in proprioception

Current investigations show that two separate sets of motoneurons control the extraocular eye muscles, and that is there is a dual final common pathway. We propose that one set of motoneurons are the major source of tension generating eye movements, whereas the other may participate in a proprioceptive system concerned more with the exact alignment and stabilization of the eyes. In this article we discuss the structures that may participate in the proprioceptive circuits; and consider several recent publications in the light of this sensory feedback hypothesis, emphasizing the relevance to eye movement disorders.

The functions of the proprioceptors of the eye muscles

This article sets out to present a fairly comprehensive review of our knowledge about the functions of the receptors that have been found in the extraocular muscles--the six muscles that move each eye of vertebrates in its orbit--of all the animals in which they have been sought, including Man. Since their discovery at the beginning of the 20th century these receptors have, at various times, been credited with important roles in the control of eye movement and the construction of extrapersonal space and have also been denied any function whatsoever. Experiments intended to study the actions of eye muscle receptors and, even more so, opinions (and indeed polemic) derived from these observations have been influenced by the changing fashions and beliefs about the more general question of how limb position and movement is detected by the brain and which signals contribute to those aspects of this that are perceived (kinaesthesis). But the conclusions drawn from studies on the eye have also influenced beliefs about the mechanisms of kinaesthesis and, arguably, this influence has been even larger than that in the converse direction. Experimental evidence accumulated over rather more than a century is set out and discussed. It supports the view that, at the beginning of the 21st century, there are excellent grounds for believing that the receptors in the extraocular muscles are indeed proprioceptors, that is to say that the signals that they send into the brain are used to provide information about the position and movement of the eye in the orbit. It seems that this information is important in the control of eye movements of at least some types, and in the determination by the brain of the direction of gaze and the relationship of the organism to its environment. In addition, signals from these receptors in the eye muscles are seen to be necessary for the development of normal mechanisms of visual analysis in the mammalian visual cortex and for both the development and maintenance of normal visuomotor behaviour. Man is among those vertebrates to whose brains eye muscle proprioceptive signals provide information apparently used in normal sensorimotor functions; these include various aspects of perception, and of the control of eye movement. It is possible that abnormalities of the eye muscle proprioceptors and their signals may play a part in the genesis of some types of human squint (strabismus); conversely studies of patients with squint in the course of their surgical or pharmacological treatment have yielded much interesting evidence about the central actions of the proprioceptive signals from the extraocular muscles. The results of experiments on the eye have played a large part in the historical controversy, now in at least its third century, about the origin of signals that inform the brain about movement of parts of the body. Some of these results, and more of the interpretations of them, now need to be critically re-examined. The re-examination in the light of recent experiments that is presented here does not support many of the conclusions confidently drawn in the past and leads to both new insights and fresh questions about the roles of information from motor signals flowing out of the brain and that from signals from the peripheral receptors flowing into it. There remain many lacunae in our knowledge and filling some of these will, it is contended, be essential to advance our understanding further. It is argued that such understanding of eye muscle proprioception is a necessary part of the understanding of the physiology and pathophysiology of eye movement control and that it is also essential to an account of how organisms, including Man, build and maintain knowledge of their relationship to the external visual world. The eye would seem to provide a uniquely favourable system in which to study the way in which information derived within the brain about motor actions may interact with signals flowing in from peripheral receptors. The review is constructed in relatively independent sections that deal with particular topics. It ends with a fairly brief piece in which the author sets out some personal views about what has been achieved recently and what most immediately needs to be done. It also suggests some lines of study that appear to the author to be important for the future.