Munoz Douglas P, Fecteau Jillian H
Centre for Neuroscience Studies, CIHR Group in Sensory-Motor Systems, Department of Physiology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada.
Prog Brain Res. 2002;140:3-19. doi: 10.1016/S0079-6123(02)40039-8.
By the time you have reached this point, your daily count of alternating saccades and fixations will have increased considerably. So too will have your understanding of the dynamic interactions model. In the superior colliculi, visual fixation and saccadic initiation may be viewed as independent motor plans that compete for dominance across the intermediate layers. Extrinsic input modifies a point location on the retinotopic motor map that is shaped into a motor plan through the intrinsic circuitry of the superior colliculi. Independent motor plans compete for selection in a push-pull fashion and when a saccadic plan ultimately reaches threshold, it produces a strong burst of action potentials that shuts down the remaining regions of the intermediate layers. Modifying the activity of the intermediate layers changes these dynamic interactions in predictable ways. Enhancing the activity of one region facilitates nearby locations and inhibits distant locations. Diminishing the activity of one region inhibits nearby locations and facilitates distant locations. Such effects have been demonstrated in the neurophysiological activity of single cells (Munoz and Istvan, 1998; Olivier et al., 1999) and in behavior (Hikosaka and Wurtz, 1985; Munoz and Wurtz, 1993b). In addition to explaining visual fixation and saccadic initiation during basic saccadic tasks, the dynamic interactions model can explain changes in the timing of saccadic initiation that are observed when this task is modified. Namely, the gap effect, or decreased saccadic reaction times as a consequence of a gap period, occurs because removing fixation decreases the activity of fixation regions and, correspondingly, increases the excitability of saccadic regions. Express saccades, are a special instance of such dynamic interactions, in which decreased fixation activity and heightened motor preparation signals cause the target-related activity to be translated into a saccadic signal immediately. Finally, the slowing of saccadic initiation for antisaccades, can be interpreted as the consequence of multiple competing signals across the intermediate layers. It should be emphasized that the dynamic interactions that we have described in this chapter are not limited to the superior colliculi. On the contrary, similar interactions take place at many levels of the neuraxis (Moschovakis et al., 1996; Leigh and Zee, 1999; Schall and Thompson, 1999; Hikosaka et al., 2000; Munoz et al., 2000; Glimcher, 2001; Scudder et al., 2002). At this juncture, however, the dynamic interactions involved in producing visual fixation and saccadic initiation are better understood in the superior colliculi because of its well-organized motor map and its well-characterized neuronal elements. Although we are a long way from understanding how the brain controls visual fixation and saccadic initiation, we have made substantial progress in understanding these behaviors in the superior colliculi.
当你读到这里时,你每日交替扫视和注视的次数会大幅增加。你对动态交互模型的理解也会加深。在上丘中,视觉注视和扫视启动可被视为相互竞争主导地位的独立运动计划,横跨中间层。外部输入会修改视网膜定位运动图谱上的一个点位置,该位置通过上丘的内在神经回路形成一个运动计划。独立的运动计划以推挽方式竞争选择,当一个扫视计划最终达到阈值时,它会产生强烈的动作电位爆发,从而关闭中间层的其余区域。改变中间层的活动会以可预测的方式改变这些动态交互。增强一个区域的活动会促进附近位置并抑制远处位置。减少一个区域的活动会抑制附近位置并促进远处位置。这种效应已在单细胞的神经生理活动中得到证实(穆尼奥斯和伊斯特万,1998年;奥利维尔等人,1999年)以及行为中(日高坂和伍尔茨,1985年;穆尼奥斯和伍尔茨,1993b)。除了解释基本扫视任务中的视觉注视和扫视启动外,动态交互模型还可以解释当该任务被修改时观察到的扫视启动时间的变化。即,间隙效应,或由于间隙期导致的扫视反应时间缩短,是因为去除注视会降低注视区域的活动,相应地增加扫视区域的兴奋性。快速扫视是这种动态交互的一个特殊例子,其中注视活动的减少和运动准备信号的增强导致与目标相关的活动立即转化为扫视信号。最后,反扫视的扫视启动延迟,可以解释为中间层多个竞争信号的结果。应该强调的是,我们在本章中描述的动态交互并不局限于上丘。相反,类似的交互发生在神经轴的许多层面(莫斯乔瓦基斯等人,1996年;利和泽,1999年;沙尔和汤普森,1999年;日高坂等人,2000年;穆尼奥斯等人,2000年;格利姆彻,2001年;斯卡德等人,2002年)。然而,在这个关头,由于上丘有组织良好的运动图谱和特征明确的神经元元件,产生视觉注视和扫视启动所涉及的动态交互在上丘中得到了更好的理解。虽然我们距离理解大脑如何控制视觉注视和扫视启动还有很长的路要走,但我们在上丘中理解这些行为方面已经取得了实质性进展。