Modeling eye-head gaze shifts in multiple contexts without motor planning

Ventral premotor cortex encodes task relevant features during eye and head movements

Visual exploration of the environment is achieved through gaze shifts or coordinated movements of the eyes and the head. The kinematics and contributions of each component can be decoupled to fit the context of the required behavior, such as redirecting the visual axis without moving the head or rotating the head without changing the line of sight. A neural controller of these effectors, therefore, must show code relating to multiple muscle groups, and it must also differentiate its code based on context. In this study we tested whether the ventral premotor cortex (PMv) in monkey exhibits a population code relating to various features of eye and head movements. We constructed three different behavioral tasks or contexts, each with four variables to explore whether PMv modulates its activity in accordance with these factors. We found that task related population code in PMv differentiates between all task related features and conclude that PMv carries information about task relevant features during eye and head movements. Furthermore, this code represents both lower-level (effector and movement direction) and higher-level (context) information.

Two Distinct Types of Eye-Head Coupling in Freely Moving Mice

Animals actively interact with their environment to gather sensory information. There is conflicting evidence about how mice use vision to sample their environment. During head restraint, mice make rapid eye movements coupled between the eyes, similar to conjugate saccadic eye movements in humans. However, when mice are free to move their heads, eye movements are more complex and often non-conjugate, with the eyes moving in opposite directions. We combined head and eye tracking in freely moving mice and found both observations are explained by two eye-head coupling types, associated with vestibular mechanisms. The first type comprised non-conjugate eye movements, which compensate for head tilt changes to maintain a similar visual field relative to the horizontal ground plane. The second type of eye movements was conjugate and coupled to head yaw rotation to produce a "saccade and fixate" gaze pattern. During head-initiated saccades, the eyes moved together in the head direction but during subsequent fixation moved in the opposite direction to the head to compensate for head rotation. This saccade and fixate pattern is similar to humans who use eye movements (with or without head movement) to rapidly shift gaze but in mice relies on combined head and eye movements. Both couplings were maintained during social interactions and visually guided object tracking. Even in head-restrained mice, eye movements were invariably associated with attempted head motion. Our results reveal that mice combine head and eye movements to sample their environment and highlight similarities and differences between eye movements in mice and humans.

Evidence a shared mechanism mediates ipsi- and contralesional compensatory saccades and gait after unilateral vestibular deafferentation

The study objective was to understand how the contralesional labyrinth contributes to gaze and gait stability after unilateral vestibular deafferentation (UVD). Head impulse testing (vHIT) was completed in 37 individuals [22 women (59%); age 52.13 ± 11.59 yr, mean ± SD] with UVD from vestibular schwannoma resection. Compensatory saccades (CS) and vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) gain were analyzed for both ipsilesional and contralesional impulses. Gait speed (10-m walk test) and endurance (2-min walk test) were collected for 35 individuals. CS were recruited during contralesional head rotation regardless of VOR gain on either the ipsilesional [ρ = 0.21 (−0.14, 0.57); Spearman rank (95% confidence interval)] or contralesional side [ρ = −0.04 (−0.42, 0.35)]. Additionally, the latency of these CS (151.19 ± 52.41 ms) was similar to that of CS generated during ipsilesional rotation (165.65 ± 21.62 ms; P = 0.159). CS recruited during ipsilesional vHIT were of a higher velocity ( P < 0.001) and greater frequency ( P < 0.001) compared with contralesional CS. VOR gain asymmetry was significantly correlated with gait speed [ρ = −0.37 (−0.73, −0.01)], yet individual VOR gain was not correlated [ipsilesional: ρ = 0.17 (−0.20, 0.55); contralesional: ρ = −0.18 (−0.52, 0.15)]. Our data reveal CS are recruited at similar latencies without correlation to VOR gain or direction of head rotation, and that the central integration of ipsilesional and contralesional vestibular afference correlates with gait. Together, our data suggest the brain considers vestibular afference from both sides when generating related behavioral output after UVD.

NEW & NOTEWORTHY After unilateral vestibular deafferentation, compensatory saccades (CS) have similar latencies regardless of the direction of head rotation, and those CS generated during contralesional head rotation are unrelated to extent of vestibular loss. Additionally, the extent of asymmetry in residual vestibular function, not the extent of vestibular loss, correlates with gait speed. Our data suggest a common mechanism is responsible for the generation of CS and restoration of gait speed in vestibular compensation.

Do postural constraints affect eye, head, and arm coordination?

If a whole body reaching task is produced when standing or adopting challenging postures, it is unclear whether changes in attentional demands or the sensorimotor integration necessary for balance control influence the interaction between visuomotor and postural components of the movement. Is gaze control prioritized by the central nervous system (CNS) to produce coordinated eye movements with the head and whole body regardless of movement context? Considering the coupled nature of visuomotor and whole body postural control during action, this study aimed to understand how changing equilibrium constraints (in the form of different postural configurations) influenced the initiation of eye, head, and arm movements. We quantified the eye-head metrics and segmental kinematics as participants executed either isolated gaze shifts or whole body reaching movements to visual targets. In total, four postural configurations were compared: seated, natural stance, with the feet together (narrow stance), or while balancing on a wooden beam. Contrary to our initial predictions, the lack of distinct changes in eye-head metrics; timing of eye, head, and arm movement initiation; and gaze accuracy, in spite of kinematic differences, suggests that the CNS integrates postural constraints into the control necessary to initiate gaze shifts. This may be achieved by adopting a whole body gaze strategy that allows for the successful completion of both gaze and reaching goals.

NEW & NOTEWORTHY Differences in sequence of movement among the eye, head, and arm have been shown across various paradigms during reaching. Here we show that distinct changes in eye characteristics and movement sequence, coupled with stereotyped profiles of head and gaze movement, are not observed when adopting postures requiring changes to balance constraints. This suggests that a whole body gaze strategy is prioritized by the central nervous system with postural control subservient to gaze stability requirements.

Corrective response times in a coordinated eye-head-arm countermanding task

Inhibition of motor responses has been described as a race between two competing decision processes of motor initiation and inhibition, which manifest as the reaction time (RT) and the stop signal reaction time (SSRT); in the case where motor initiation wins out over inhibition, an erroneous movement occurs that usually needs to be corrected, leading to corrective response times (CRTs). Here we used a combined eye-head-arm movement countermanding task to investigate the mechanisms governing multiple effector coordination and the timing of corrective responses. We found a high degree of correlation between effector response times for RT, SSRT, and CRT, suggesting that decision processes are strongly dependent across effectors. To gain further insight into the mechanisms underlying CRTs, we tested multiple models to describe the distribution of RTs, SSRTs, and CRTs. The best-ranked model (according to 3 information criteria) extends the LATER race model governing RTs and SSRTs, whereby a second motor initiation process triggers the corrective response (CRT) only after the inhibition process completes in an expedited fashion. Our model suggests that the neural processing underpinning a failed decision has a residual effect on subsequent actions. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Failure to inhibit erroneous movements typically results in corrective movements. For coordinated eye-head-hand movements we show that corrective movements are only initiated after the erroneous movement cancellation signal has reached a decision threshold in an accelerated fashion.

Eye-Head Coordination in 31 Space Shuttle Astronauts during Visual Target Acquisition

Between 1989 and 1995, NASA evaluated how increases in flight duration of up to 17 days affected the health and performance of Space Shuttle astronauts. Thirty-one Space Shuttle pilots participating in 17 space missions were tested at 3 different times before flight and 3 different times after flight, starting within a few hours of return to Earth. The astronauts moved their head and eyes as quickly as possible from the central fixation point to a specified target located 20°, 30°, or 60° off center. Eye movements were measured with electro-oculography (EOG). Head movements were measured with a triaxial rate sensor system mounted on a headband. The mean time to visually acquire the targets immediately after landing was 7–10% (30–34 ms) slower than mean preflight values, but results returned to baseline after 48 hours. This increase in gaze latency was due to a decrease in velocity and amplitude of both the eye saccade and head movement toward the target. Results were similar after all space missions, regardless of length.

New insights into vestibular-saccade interaction based on covert corrective saccades in patients with unilateral vestibular deficits

In response to passive high-acceleration head impulses, patients with low vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) gains often produce covert (executed while the head is still moving) corrective saccades in the direction of deficient slow phases. Here we examined 23 patients using passive, and 9 also active, head impulses with acute (< 10 days from onset) unilateral vestibular neuritis and low VOR gains. We found that when corrective saccades are larger than 10°, the slow-phase component of the VOR is inhibited, even though inhibition increases further the time to reacquire the fixation target. We also found that 1) saccades are faster and more accurate if the residual VOR gain is higher, 2) saccades also compensate for the head displacement that occurs during the saccade, and 3) the amplitude-peak velocity relationship of the larger corrective saccades deviates from that of head-fixed saccades of the same size. We propose a mathematical model to account for these findings hypothesizing that covert saccades are driven by a desired gaze position signal based on a prediction of head displacement using vestibular and extravestibular signals, covert saccades are controlled by a gaze feedback loop, and the VOR command is modulated according to predicted saccade amplitude. A central and novel feature of the model is that the brain develops two separate estimates of head rotation, one for generating saccades while the head is moving and the other for generating slow phases. Furthermore, while the model was developed for gaze-stabilizing behavior during passively induced head impulses, it also simulates both active gaze-stabilizing and active gaze-shifting eye movements.NEW & NOTEWORTHY During active or passive head impulses while fixating stationary targets, low vestibulo-ocular gain subjects produce corrective saccades when the head is still moving. The mechanisms driving these covert saccades are poorly understood. We propose a mathematical model showing that the brain develops two separate estimates of head rotation: a lower level one, presumably in the vestibular nuclei, used to generate the slow-phase component of the response, and a higher level one, within a gaze feedback loop, used to drive corrective saccades.