McKenzie A, Lisberger S G
J Neurophysiol. 1986 Jul;56(1):196-207. doi: 10.1152/jn.1986.56.1.196.
Monkeys were trained to make saccades to briefly flashed targets. We presented the flash during smooth pursuit of another target, so that there was a smooth change in eye position after the flash. We could then determine whether the flash-evoked saccades compensated for the intervening smooth eye movements to point the eyes at the position of the flash in space. We defined the "retinal error" as the vector from the position of the eye at the time of the flash to the position of the target. We defined "spatial error" as the vector from the position of the eye at the time of the saccade to the position of the flashed target in space. The direction of the saccade (in polar coordinates) was more highly correlated with the direction of the retinal error than with the direction of the spatial error. Saccade amplitude was also better correlated with the amplitude of the retinal error. We obtained the same results whether the flash was presented during pursuit with the head fixed or during pursuit with combined eye-head movements. Statistical analysis demonstrated that the direction of the saccade was determined only by the retinal error in two of the three monkeys. In the third monkey saccade direction was determined primarily by retinal error but had a consistent bias toward spatial error. The bias can be attributed to this monkey's earlier practice in which the flashed target was reilluminated so he could ultimately make a saccade to the correct position in space. These data suggest that the saccade generator does not normally use nonvisual feedback about smooth changes in eye or gaze position. In two monkeys we also provided sequential target flashes during pursuit with the second flash timed so that it occurred just before the first saccade. As above, the first saccade was appropriate for the retinal error provided by the first flash. The second saccade compensated for the first and pointed the eyes at the position of the second target in space. We conclude, as others have before (12, 21), that the saccade generator receives feedback about its own output, saccades. Our results require revision of existing models of the neural network that generates saccades. We suggest two models that retain the use of internal feedback suggested by others. We favor a model that accounts for our data by assuming that internal feedback originates directly from the output of the saccade generator and reports only saccadic changes in eye position.
猴子经过训练,能对短暂闪现的目标做出扫视动作。我们在猴子平稳追踪另一个目标的过程中呈现闪光,这样在闪光之后眼睛位置会有平稳的变化。然后我们就能确定闪光诱发的扫视动作是否补偿了其间的平稳眼球运动,从而使眼睛指向空间中闪光的位置。我们将“视网膜误差”定义为从闪光时刻眼睛的位置到目标位置的向量。我们将“空间误差”定义为从扫视时刻眼睛的位置到空间中闪光目标位置的向量。扫视动作的方向(用极坐标表示)与视网膜误差的方向相关性比与空间误差的方向相关性更高。扫视幅度与视网膜误差的幅度相关性也更好。无论闪光是在头部固定的追踪过程中呈现,还是在眼球 - 头部联合运动的追踪过程中呈现,我们都得到了相同的结果。统计分析表明,在三只猴子中的两只里,扫视动作的方向仅由视网膜误差决定。在第三只猴子中,扫视方向主要由视网膜误差决定,但对空间误差存在一致的偏向。这种偏向可归因于这只猴子早期的训练,在训练中闪光目标会重新照亮,这样它最终就能对空间中的正确位置做出扫视动作。这些数据表明,扫视发生器通常不会使用关于眼睛或注视位置平稳变化的非视觉反馈。在两只猴子身上,我们还在追踪过程中提供了连续的目标闪光,第二个闪光的时间设定为恰好在第一个扫视动作之前出现。和上述情况一样,第一个扫视动作与第一个闪光提供的视网膜误差相匹配。第二个扫视动作补偿了第一个扫视动作,并使眼睛指向空间中第二个目标的位置。我们和其他人之前一样(参考文献12、21)得出结论,扫视发生器会接收关于其自身输出(即扫视动作)的反馈。我们的结果需要对现有的生成扫视动作的神经网络模型进行修正。我们提出了两种保留其他人所建议的使用内部反馈的模型。我们倾向于一种模型,该模型通过假设内部反馈直接源自扫视发生器的输出,并且仅报告眼睛位置的扫视变化来解释我们的数据。