The Frontal Eye Fields Limit the Capacity of Visual Short-Term Memory in Rhesus Monkeys

The frontal eye fields (FEF) in rhesus monkeys have been implicated in visual short-term memory (VSTM) as well as control of visual attention. Here we examined the importance of the area in the VSTM capacity and the relationship between VSTM and attention, using the chemical inactivation technique and multi-target saccade tasks with or without the need of target-location memory. During FEF inactivation, serial saccades to targets defined by color contrast were unaffected, but saccades relying on short-term memory were impaired when the target count was at the capacity limit of VSTM. The memory impairment was specific to the FEF-coded retinotopic locations, and subject to competition among targets distributed across visual fields. These results together suggest that the FEF plays a crucial role during the entry of information into VSTM, by enabling attention deployment on targets to be remembered. In this view, the memory capacity results from the limited availability of attentional resources provided by FEF: The FEF can concurrently maintain only a limited number of activations to register the targets into memory. When lesions render part of the area unavailable for activation, the number would decrease, further reducing the capacity of VSTM.     

Cortical potentials evoked to response to a signal to make a memory-guided saccade

The difference in parameters of visually guided and memory-guided saccades was shown. Increase in the memory-guided saccade latency as compared to that of the visually guided saccades may indicate the deceleration of saccadic programming on the basis of information extraction from the memory. The comparison of parameters and topography of evoked components N1 and P1 of the evoked potential on the signal to make a memory- or visually guided saccade suggests that the early stage of the saccade programming associated with the space information processing is performed predominantly with top-down attention mechanism before the memory-guided saccade and bottom-up mechanism before the visually guided saccade. The findings show that the increase in the latency of the memory-guided saccades is connected with decision making at the central stage of the saccade programming. We proposed that wave N2, which develops in the middle of the latent period of the memory-guided saccades, is correlated with this process. Topography and spatial dynamics of components N1, P1 and N2 testify that the memory-guided saccade programming is controlled by the frontal mediothalamic system of selective attention and left-hemispheric brain mechanisms of motor attention.     

The neural selection and control of saccades by the frontal eye field

Recent research has provided new insights into the neural processes that select the target for and control the production of a shift of gaze. Being a key node in the network that subserves visual processing and saccade production, the frontal eye field (FEF) has been an effective area in which to monitor these processes. Certain neurons in the FEF signal the location of conspicuous or meaningful stimuli that may be the targets for saccades. Other neurons control whether and when the gaze shifts. The existence of distinct neural processes for visual selection and saccade production is necessary to explain the flexibility of visually guided behaviour.     

The Frontal Eye Field Is Involved in Visual Vector Inversion in Humans – A Theta Burst Stimulation Study

In the antisaccade task, subjects are requested to suppress a reflexive saccade towards a visual target and to perform a saccade towards the opposite side. In addition, in order to reproduce an accurate saccadic amplitude, the visual saccade vector (i.e., the distance between a central fixation point and the peripheral target) must be exactly inverted from one visual hemifield to the other. Results from recent studies using a correlational approach (i.e., fMRI, MEG) suggest that not only the posterior parietal cortex (PPC) but also the frontal eye field (FEF) might play an important role in such a visual vector inversion process. In order to assess whether the FEF contributes to visual vector inversion, we applied an interference approach with continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) during a memory-guided antisaccade task. In 10 healthy subjects, one train of cTBS was applied over the right FEF prior to a memory-guided antisaccade task. In comparison to the performance without stimulation or with sham stimulation, cTBS over the right FEF induced a hypometric gain for rightward but not leftward antisaccades. These results obtained with an interference approach confirm that the FEF is also involved in the process of visual vector inversion.     

Cell-type-specific synchronization of neural activity in FEF with V4 during attention

Shifts of gaze and shifts of attention are closely linked and it is debated whether they result from the same neural mechanisms. Both processes involve the frontal eye fields (FEF), an area which is also a source of top-down feedback to area V4 during covert attention. To test the relative contributions of oculomotor and attention-related FEF signals to such feedback, we recorded simultaneously from both areas in a covert attention task and in a saccade task. In the attention task, only visual and visuomovement FEF neurons showed enhanced responses, whereas movement cells were unchanged. Importantly, visual, but not movement or visuomovement cells, showed enhanced gamma frequency synchronization with activity in V4 during attention. Within FEF, beta synchronization was increased for movement cells during attention but was suppressed in the saccade task. These findings support the idea that the attentional modulation of visual processing is not mediated by movement neurons.     

Feature-based attention in the frontal eye field and area V4 during visual search

When we search for a target in a crowded visual scene, we often use the distinguishing features of the target, such as color or shape, to guide our attention and eye movements. To investigate the neural mechanisms of feature-based attention, we simultaneously recorded neural responses in the frontal eye field (FEF) and area V4 while monkeys performed a visual search task. The responses of cells in both areas were modulated by feature attention, independent of spatial attention, and the magnitude of response enhancement was inversely correlated with the number of saccades needed to find the target. However, an analysis of the latency of sensory and attentional influences on responses suggested that V4 provides bottom-up sensory information about stimulus features, whereas the FEF provides a top-down attentional bias toward target features that modulates sensory processing in V4 and that could be used to guide the eyes to a searched-for target.     

Distinct control of initiation and metrics of memory-guided saccades and vergence by the FEF: a TMS study

Background

The initiation of memory guided saccades is known to be controlled by the frontal eye field (FEF). Recent physiological studies showed the existence of an area close to FEF that controls also vergence initiation and execution. This study is to explore the effect of transcranial magnetic simulation (TMS) over FEF on the control of memory-guided saccade-vergence eye movements.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Subjects had to make an eye movement in dark towards a target flashed 1 sec earlier (memory delay); the location of the target relative to fixation point was such as to require either a vergence along the median plane, or a saccade, or a saccade with vergence; trials were interleaved. Single pulse TMS was applied on the left or right FEF; it was delivered at 100 ms after the end of memory delay, i.e. extinction of fixation LED that was the “go” signal. Twelve healthy subjects participated in the study. TMS of left or right FEF prolonged the latency of all types of eye movements; the increase varied from 21 to 56 ms and was particularly strong for the divergence movements. This indicates that FEF is involved in the initiation of all types of memory guided movement in the 3D space. TMS of the FEF also altered the accuracy but only for leftward saccades combined with either convergence or divergence; intrasaccadic vergence also increased after TMS of the FEF.

Conclusions/Significance

The results suggest anisotropy in the quality of space memory and are discussed in the context of other known perceptual motor anisotropies.     

Measurements of simultaneously recorded spiking activity and local field potentials suggest that spatial selection emerges in the frontal eye field

The frontal eye field (FEF) participates in selecting the location of behaviorally relevant stimuli for guiding attention and eye movements. We simultaneously recorded local field potentials (LFPs) and spiking activity in the FEF of monkeys performing memory-guided saccade and covert visual search tasks. We compared visual latencies and the time course of spatially selective responses in LFPs and spiking activity. Consistent with the view that LFPs represent synaptic input, visual responses appeared first in the LFPs followed by visual responses in the spiking activity. However, spatially selective activity identifying the location of the target in the visual search array appeared in the spikes about 30 ms before it appeared in the LFPs. Because LFPs reflect dendritic input and spikes measure neuronal output in a local brain region, this temporal relationship suggests that spatial selection necessary for attention and eye movements is computed locally in FEF from spatially nonselective inputs.     

The Human Frontal Oculomotor Cortical Areas Contribute Asymmetrically to Motor Planning in a Gap Saccade Task

Background

Saccadic eye movements are used to rapidly align the fovea with the image of objects of interest in peripheral vision. We have recently shown that in children there is a high preponderance of quick latency but poorly planned saccades that consistently fall short of the target goal. The characteristics of these multiple saccades are consistent with a lack of proper inhibitory control of cortical oculomotor areas on the brainstem saccade generation circuitry.

Methodology/Principal Findings

In the present paper, we directly tested this assumption by using single pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to transiently disrupt neuronal activity in the frontal eye fields (FEF) and supplementary eye fields (SEF) in adults performing a gap saccade task. The results showed that the incidence of multiple saccades was increased for ispiversive but not contraversive directions for the right and left FEF, the left SEF, but not for the right SEF. Moreover, this disruption was most substantial during the ∼50 ms period around the appearance of the peripheral target. A control condition in which the dorsal motor cortex was stimulated demonstrated that this was not due to any non-specific effects of the TMS influencing the spatial distribution of attention.

Conclusions/Significance

Taken together, the results are consistent with a direction-dependent role of the FEF and left SEF in delaying the release of saccadic eye movements until they have been fully planned.     

Les antisaccades: données expérimentales et applications cliniques dans la schizophrénie

Oculomotor tasks are now largely used as powerful tools in the analysis of various cognitive processes, such as executive functions involving the frontal lobes. Beyond these tests, the antisaccade task enables the evaluation of an oculomotor inhibitory function mainly controlled by the prefrontal cortex. In this paradigm, a subject is instructed to cancel a reflexive eye movement (called a reflexive saccade), spontaneously triggered towards a visual target of sudden appearance, and, instead, trigger a voluntary saccade in the opposite direction (called an antisaccade). Impairment of this inhibitory function results in a high number of saccades reflexively triggered towards the visual target, i.e. an increased error rate (percentage of non-inhibited reflexive saccades). The neural basis of this test is now well established, and it is recognized that it represents a useful tool for the functional evaluation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. It is indeed dramatically impaired in all cerebral disorders that involve this frontal area and, in psychiatry, a large number of studies have shown that it is frequently impaired in people with schizophrenia, even at early stages and independently of clinical symptomatology. It is also impaired, although to a lesser extent, in relatives and is, therefore, considered an endophenotype of the disease. This test is now used in both clinical practice (diagnosis and prognosis) and as a research tool in psychopathology and pharmacology.     

Where do i look? From attention to action in the frontal eye field

The frontal eye field (FEF) has been known as a key player in the generation of saccade motor commands and in the allocation of spatial attention. In this issue of Neuron, Schafer and Moore demonstrate that FEF microstimulation enhances the effect of a position illusion induced by visual motion on saccades. This finding suggests that FEF activity can modulate the deployment of spatial attention, which in turn can alter saccade motor commands.     

Top-Down but Not Bottom-Up Visual Scanning is Affected in Hereditary Pure Cerebellar Ataxia

The aim of this study was to clarify the nature of visual processing deficits caused by cerebellar disorders. We studied the performance of two types of visual search (top-down visual scanning and bottom-up visual scanning) in 18 patients with pure cerebellar types of spinocerebellar degeneration (SCA6: 11; SCA31: 7). The gaze fixation position was recorded with an eye-tracking device while the subjects performed two visual search tasks in which they looked for a target Landolt figure among distractors. In the serial search task, the target was similar to the distractors and the subject had to search for the target by processing each item with top-down visual scanning. In the pop-out search task, the target and distractor were clearly discernible and the visual salience of the target allowed the subjects to detect it by bottom-up visual scanning. The saliency maps clearly showed that the serial search task required top-down visual attention and the pop-out search task required bottom-up visual attention. In the serial search task, the search time to detect the target was significantly longer in SCA patients than in normal subjects, whereas the search time in the pop-out search task was comparable between the two groups. These findings suggested that SCA patients cannot efficiently scan a target using a top-down attentional process, whereas scanning with a bottom-up attentional process is not affected. In the serial search task, the amplitude of saccades was significantly smaller in SCA patients than in normal subjects. The variability of saccade amplitude (saccadic dysmetria), number of re-fixations, and unstable fixation (nystagmus) were larger in SCA patients than in normal subjects, accounting for a substantial proportion of scattered fixations around the items. Saccadic dysmetria, re-fixation, and nystagmus may play important roles in the impaired top-down visual scanning in SCA, hampering precise visual processing of individual items.     

Error Correcting Mechanisms during Antisaccades: Contribution of Online Control during Primary Saccades and Offline Control via Secondary Saccades

Errors in eye movements can be corrected during the ongoing saccade through in-flight modifications (i.e., online control), or by programming a secondary eye movement (i.e., offline control). In a reflexive saccade task, the oculomotor system can use extraretinal information (i.e., efference copy) online to correct errors in the primary saccade, and offline retinal information to generate a secondary corrective saccade. The purpose of this study was to examine the error correction mechanisms in the antisaccade task. The roles of extraretinal and retinal feedback in maintaining eye movement accuracy were investigated by presenting visual feedback at the spatial goal of the antisaccade. We found that online control for antisaccade is not affected by the presence of visual feedback; that is whether visual feedback is present or not, the duration of the deceleration interval was extended and significantly correlated with reduced antisaccade endpoint error. We postulate that the extended duration of deceleration is a feature of online control during volitional saccades to improve their endpoint accuracy. We found that secondary saccades were generated more frequently in the antisaccade task compared to the reflexive saccade task. Furthermore, we found evidence for a greater contribution from extraretinal sources of feedback in programming the secondary “corrective” saccades in the antisaccade task. Nonetheless, secondary saccades were more corrective for the remaining antisaccade amplitude error in the presence of visual feedback of the target. Taken together, our results reveal a distinctive online error control strategy through an extension of the deceleration interval in the antisaccade task. Target feedback does not improve online control, rather it improves the accuracy of secondary saccades in the antisaccade task.     

Pre-stimulus activity predicts the winner of top-down vs. bottom-up attentional selection

Our ability to process visual information is fundamentally limited. This leads to competition between sensory information that is relevant for top-down goals and sensory information that is perceptually salient, but task-irrelevant. The aim of the present study was to identify, from EEG recordings, pre-stimulus and pre-saccadic neural activity that could predict whether top-down or bottom-up processes would win the competition for attention on a trial-by-trial basis. We employed a visual search paradigm in which a lateralized low contrast target appeared alone, or with a low (i.e., non-salient) or high contrast (i.e., salient) distractor. Trials with a salient distractor were of primary interest due to the strong competition between top-down knowledge and bottom-up attentional capture. Our results demonstrated that 1) in the 1-sec pre-stimulus interval, frontal alpha (8-12 Hz) activity was higher on trials where the salient distractor captured attention and the first saccade (bottom-up win); and 2) there was a transient pre-saccadic increase in posterior-parietal alpha (7-8 Hz) activity on trials where the first saccade went to the target (top-down win). We propose that the high frontal alpha reflects a disengagement of attentional control whereas the transient posterior alpha time-locked to the saccade indicates sensory inhibition of the salient distractor and suppression of bottom-up oculomotor capture.     

The Effects of Feature-Based Priming and Visual Working Memory on Oculomotor Capture

Recently, it has been demonstrated that objects held in working memory can influence rapid oculomotor selection. This has been taken as evidence that perceptual salience can be modified by active working memory representations. The goal of the present study was to examine whether these results could also be caused by feature-based priming. In two experiments, participants were asked to saccade to a target line segment of a certain orientation that was presented together with a to-be-ignored distractor. Both objects were given a task-irrelevant color that varied per trial. In a secondary task, a color had to be memorized, and that color could either match the color of the target, match the color of the distractor, or it did not match the color of any of the objects in the search task. The memory task was completed either after the search task (Experiment 1), or before it (Experiment 2). The results showed that in both experiments the memorized color biased oculomotor selection. Eye movements were more frequently drawn towards objects that matched the memorized color, irrespective of whether the memory task was completed after (Experiment 1) or before (Experiment 2) the search task. This bias was particularly prevalent in short-latency saccades. The results show that early oculomotor selection performance is not only affected by properties that are actively maintained in working memory but also by those previously memorized. Both working memory and feature priming can cause early biases in oculomotor selection.     

Vision as oculomotor reward: cognitive contributions to the dynamic control of saccadic eye movements

Humans and other primates are equipped with a foveated visual system. As a consequence, we reorient our fovea to objects and targets in the visual field that are conspicuous or that we consider relevant or worth looking at. These reorientations are achieved by means of saccadic eye movements. Where we saccade to depends on various low-level factors such as a targets’ luminance but also crucially on high-level factors like the expected reward or a targets’ relevance for perception and subsequent behavior. Here, we review recent findings how the control of saccadic eye movements is influenced by higher-level cognitive processes. We first describe the pathways by which cognitive contributions can influence the neural oculomotor circuit. Second, we summarize what saccade parameters reveal about cognitive mechanisms, particularly saccade latencies, saccade kinematics and changes in saccade gain. Finally, we review findings on what renders a saccade target valuable, as reflected in oculomotor behavior. We emphasize that foveal vision of the target after the saccade can constitute an internal reward for the visual system and that this is reflected in oculomotor dynamics that serve to quickly and accurately provide detailed foveal vision of relevant targets in the visual field.     

Stimulus-driven and voluntary saccades are coded in different coordinate systems

We make fast, "saccadic" eye movements to view our surroundings, "voluntary" saccades when saccade targets are deliberately selected, and "stimulus-driven" saccades when a target suddenly appears. Saccades of patients with spatial neglect have been studied to identify the coordinate systems guiding such behavior. However, previous reports disagree on whether neglect involves an eye-centered deficit of (delayed and hypometric) saccades specifically when performed in the direction opposite the brain lesion or not. We show that this inconsistency is due to independent mechanisms underlying voluntary and stimulus-driven saccades. We used a new experimental procedure comparing identical saccades performed either during an exploratory search task or a stimulus-driven task, both of which required similar cognitive functions (Figure 1). Only the patients' stimulus-driven saccades showed the eye-centered deficit. The same saccades were intact when voluntarily performed. However, here the patients showed a head-centered deficit; their saccades ignored the left part of space. In none of our control subjects with or without brain lesions did the neglect patients' pattern of deficits occur. The results argue that the brain flexibly uses a system of distinct but interrelated neural circuits for visual orienting to optimally encode its sensorimotor functions in multiple behavioral situations.     

A functional and structural investigation of the human fronto-basal volitional saccade network

Almost all cortical areas are connected to the subcortical basal ganglia (BG) through parallel recurrent inhibitory and excitatory loops, exerting volitional control over automatic behavior. As this model is largely based on non-human primate research, we used high resolution functional MRI and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) to investigate the functional and structural organization of the human (pre)frontal cortico-basal network controlling eye movements. Participants performed saccades in darkness, pro- and antisaccades and observed stimuli during fixation. We observed several bilateral functional subdivisions along the precentral sulcus around the human frontal eye fields (FEF): a medial and lateral zone activating for saccades in darkness, a more fronto-medial zone preferentially active for ipsilateral antisaccades, and a large anterior strip along the precentral sulcus activating for visual stimulus presentation during fixation. The supplementary eye fields (SEF) were identified along the medial wall containing all aforementioned functions. In the striatum, the BG area receiving almost all cortical input, all saccade related activation was observed in the putamen, previously considered a skeletomotor striatal subdivision. Activation elicited by the cue instructing pro or antisaccade trials was clearest in the medial FEF and right putamen. DTI fiber tracking revealed that the subdivisions of the human FEF complex are mainly connected to the putamen, in agreement with the fMRI findings. The present findings demonstrate that the human FEF has functional subdivisions somewhat comparable to non-human primates. However, the connections to and activation in the human striatum preferentially involve the putamen, not the caudate nucleus as is reported for monkeys. This could imply that fronto-striatal projections for the oculomotor system are fundamentally different between humans and monkeys. Alternatively, there could be a bias in published reports of monkey studies favoring the caudate nucleus over the putamen in the search for oculomotor functions.     

Human fast negative EEG potentials before express saccades

Fast negative EEG potentials preceding fast regular saccades and express saccades were studied by the method of backward averaging under conditions of monocular stimulation of the right and left eye. "Step" and "gap" experimental paradigms were used for visual stimulation. Analysis of parameters of potentials and their spatiotemporal dynamics suggests that, under conditions of the increased attention and optimal readiness of the neural structures, express saccades appear when the previously chosen program of the future eye movement coincides with the actual target coordinates. We assumed that the saccade latency decreases at the expense of the involvement of the main oculomotor areas of motor and saccadic planning in its initiation; an express saccade can be initiated also by means of direct transmission of the signal from the cortex to the brainstem saccadic generator passing by the superior colliculus. Moreover, anticipating release from the central fixation and attention distraction are necessary for the successful initiation of an express saccade.     

Looking for Discriminating Is Different from Looking for Looking’s Sake

Recent studies provide evidence for task-specific influences on saccadic eye movements. For instance, saccades exhibit higher peak velocity when the task requires coordinating eye and hand movements. The current study shows that the need to process task-relevant visual information at the saccade endpoint can be, in itself, sufficient to cause such effects. In this study, participants performed a visual discrimination task which required a saccade for successful completion. We compared the characteristics of these task-related saccades to those of classical target-elicited saccades, which required participants to fixate a visual target without performing a discrimination task. The results show that task-related saccades are faster and initiated earlier than target-elicited saccades. Differences between both saccade types are also noted in their saccade reaction time distributions and their main sequences, i.e., the relationship between saccade velocity, duration, and amplitude.