Department of Psychology, Center for Integrative & Cognitive Neuroscience, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 37240-7817, USA.
J Neurosci. 2012 Jul 25;32(30):10273-85. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6386-11.2012.
How supplementary eye field (SEF) contributes to visual search is unknown. Inputs from cortical and subcortical structures known to represent visual salience suggest that SEF may serve as an additional node in this network. This hypothesis was tested by recording action potentials and local field potentials (LFPs) in two monkeys performing an efficient pop-out visual search task. Target selection modulation, tuning width, and response magnitude of spikes and LFP in SEF were compared with those in frontal eye field. Surprisingly, only ∼2% of SEF neurons and ∼8% of SEF LFP sites selected the location of the search target. The absence of salience in SEF may be due to an absence of appropriate visual afferents, which suggests that these inputs are a necessary anatomical feature of areas representing salience. We also tested whether SEF contributes to overcoming the automatic tendency to respond to a primed color when the target identity switches during priming of pop-out. Very few SEF neurons or LFP sites modulated in association with performance deficits following target switches. However, a subset of SEF neurons and LFPs exhibited strong modulation following erroneous saccades to a distractor. Altogether, these results suggest that SEF plays a limited role in controlling ongoing visual search behavior, but may play a larger role in monitoring search performance.
补充眼区(SEF)如何参与视觉搜索尚不清楚。来自已知代表视觉显著度的皮质和皮质下结构的输入表明,SEF 可能是该网络中的另一个节点。通过在两只猴子执行高效弹出式视觉搜索任务时记录动作电位和局部场电位(LFP)来检验这一假设。比较了 SEF 中的尖峰和 LFP 的目标选择调制、调谐宽度和响应幅度与额眼区的目标选择调制、调谐宽度和响应幅度。令人惊讶的是,只有约 2%的 SEF 神经元和约 8%的 SEF LFP 位点选择了搜索目标的位置。SEF 中缺乏显著性可能是由于缺乏适当的视觉传入,这表明这些输入是代表显著性的区域的必要解剖特征。我们还测试了 SEF 是否有助于克服在弹出式启动期间目标身份切换时对启动颜色的自动反应倾向。很少有 SEF 神经元或 LFP 位点与目标切换后的表现缺陷相关联地进行调制。然而,SEF 神经元和 LFPs 的子集在错误扫视到分心物后表现出强烈的调制。总的来说,这些结果表明,SEF 在控制正在进行的视觉搜索行为方面的作用有限,但在监测搜索性能方面可能发挥更大的作用。