(Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 2000;41:3763-3769.)
© 2000
by The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
Context-Specific Adaptation of Pursuit Initiation in Humans
Mineo Takagi1,2,
Haruki Abe1,
Shigeru Hasegawa1,
Tomoaki Usui1,
Hiruma Hasebe1,
Atsushi Miki1 and
David S. Zee3
1 From the Department of Ophthalmology, Niigata University School of Medicine, Niigata, Japan;
2 CREST, Japan Science and Technology; and
3 Department of Neurology, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland.
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
PURPOSE. To determine if multiple states for the initiation of pursuit, as
assessed by acceleration in the "open-loop" period, can be learned
and gated by context.
METHODS. Four normal subjects were studied. A modified step-ramp paradigm for
horizontal pursuit was used to induce adaptation. In an
increasing paradigm, target velocity doubled 230 msec
after onset; in a decreasing paradigm, it was halved. In
the first experiment, vertical eye position (±5°) was used as the
context cue, and the training paradigm (increasing or decreasing)
changed with vertical eye position. In the second experiment, with
vertical position constant, when the target was red, training was
decreasing, and when green, increasing. The average eye acceleration in
the first 100 msec of tracking was the index of open-loop pursuit
performance.
RESULTS. With vertical position as the cue, pursuit adaptation differed between
up and down gaze. In some cases, the direction of adaptation was in
exact accord with the training stimuli. In others, acceleration
increased or decreased for both up and down gaze but always in correct
relative proportion to the training stimuli. In contrast, multiple
adaptive states were not induced with color as the cue.
CONCLUSIONS. Multiple values for the relationship between the average eye
acceleration during the initiation of pursuit and target velocity could
be learned and gated by context. Vertical position was an effective
contextual cue but not target color, implying that useful contextual
cues must be similar to those occurring naturally, for example, orbital
position with eye muscle weakness.
 |
Introduction
|
|---|
When primates track a small object moving across their field of
view, they use pursuit eye movements to stabilize the image of the
object upon the fovea. Because slippage of images across the retina is
an important stimulus that drives the pursuit system, which, in turn,
generates eye movements to reduce the magnitude of this slip, pursuit
is regarded as a visual feedback ("closed-loop") control system.
However, there are inherent delays in the processing of visual
information necessary to produce a pursuit command, so that whenever a
target of interest changes its speed or direction unpredictably, the
pursuit system must operate in an "open-loop" mode for roughly 130
msec,1
2
without the benefit of immediate feedback.
Consequently, as is the case for other open-loop ocular motor
subsystems such as saccades3
4
and the vestibulo-ocular
reflex,5
the open-loop period of pursuit must be
accessible to long-term calibration so that the speed of the eyes is
brought to that of the target as quickly as possible and kept there
without any motor instability or oscillations that would interfere with
visual acuity. These considerations predict an adaptive capability for
calibrating the open-loop, initial portion of the pursuit tracking
response, and indeed such has been demonstrated in both monkeys and
humans.6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Typically, the average acceleration of the
eye in the first 100 to 130 msec of pursuit tracking was used as a
measure of the open-loop response of the pursuit system and was shown
to be modifiable in various learning paradigms. Recently, for the
vestibular, saccadic, and vergence systems it has been shown that more
than one adaptive eye movement response can be learned and gated in or
out depending on context.13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Here, we investigated
context-specific adaptation of pursuit, looking at the influence of a
nonvisual cue, vertical eye position, and a visual cue, target color.
 |
Methods
|
|---|
Subjects
Four normal subjects (2937 years old) participated. They had
normal corrected vision, eye motility, and ocular alignment. The head
was immobilized with a dental bite bar. Viewing was always binocular
and refractive error was corrected with lenses. Subjects were told to
maintain their gaze on the visual target. Each subject gave informed
consent before the experiments. The research followed the tenets of the
Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the institutional human
experimentation committee.
Experimental Paradigm
The visual target was a white square, subtending a visual angle of
0.2 x 0.2°, and was presented on a video monitor located 60 cm
in front of the subject. The room was dark except for the target
lights. To induce adaptation of pursuit eye acceleration in the
open-loop period, we used a modification of the step-ramp stimulus for
pursuit in which there was a double step of velocity (Fig. 1)
. In the increasing paradigm, the visual target was first
presented for 1.5 seconds at the straight-ahead position (experiment 3)
or either 5° up or down (experiments 1 and 2) and then was moved in a
step-ramp fashion horizontally, that is, jumped to the right or left
and then moved toward the midline at a constant velocity of either 23.3
or 15.6°/sec. In response to the ramp component of the target
stimulus, pursuit eye movements began at a latency of about 150 msec.
When the target returned to its initial straight-ahead position,
approximately 230 msec after the onset of the ramp, its velocity was
doubled to 46.7 or 31.1°/sec, respectively. The target then kept
moving eccentrically until it reached the lateral extent of the display
monitor, 18° from the midline. Similarly, in the
decreasing paradigm, the presentation of the stimulus was
the same except that the velocity of the target was halved to 11.7 or
7.8°/sec, respectively.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1. Experimental paradigms used to induce horizontal pursuit adaptation.
First, the target jumped away (step) from the center fixation point and
then began moving at a constant velocity (ramp, 23.3 or 15.6°/sec)
back toward the center, but just after it crossed the center (230 msec
after the onset), target velocity doubled (A, increasing
paradigm) or halved (B, decreasing paradigm).
|
|
We tested two types of contextual cues for horizontal pursuit
adaptation, the vertical position of the eye in the orbit (experiments
1 and 2) and the color of the target (experiment 3) as shown in Figure 2
. In experiment 1, when the target appeared up 5° in the orbit, it
moved horizontally in the decreasing paradigm; when it appeared down
5°, it moved horizontally in the increasing paradigm. In experiment
2, up 5° was associated with the increasing paradigm, and down 5°
with the decreasing paradigm. In experiment 3 either the red or green
target always appeared at the straight-ahead position, but the red
target was associated with the decreasing paradigm, and the green
target with the increasing paradigm. In each experiment the direction
and velocity of target movement were not predictable. These three
experiments were conducted on different days.

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2. Configuration of the three experiments. In experiment 1
(top), when the target appeared up 5°, training was
for decreasing adaptation; when it appeared down 5°, training was for
increasing adaptation. In experiment 2 (middle), the
training was opposite relative to vertical eye position, with the
target up 5°, increasing, and down 5°, decreasing. In experiment 3
(bottom), the target appeared in the straight-ahead
position, but its color was red or green. When red, training was for
decreasing adaptation, and when green, for increasing adaptation.
|
|
Each experiment consisted of three parts: preadaptation session,
training session, and postadaptation session. Control data from the
preadaptation state were compared with the immediate postadaptation
state using the conventional step-ramp paradigm, in which there was no
change in ramp velocity. In total, 24 to 48 trials were presented. The
training session, using the double-step of velocity paradigm, lasted
for about half an hour. Each training period consisted of a total of
288 trials divided into six subsessions consisting of 48 trials each
and separated by a brief pause of about 1 minute.
Laboratory Apparatus
Horizontal and vertical eye movements of both eye were recorded
with an infrared system (Ober 2; Iota AB, Sundsvall, Sweden). A
system calibration procedure was performed about every 5 minutes during
the experiment, in which the subject was required to fix on targets
separated by 5° or 10°. The output signals were sampled by a
digital computer at 600 Hz and then stored to a hard disc for later
off-line analysis. System noise limited resolution to approximately
0.1°.
Data Analysis
Pursuit traces were analyzed using a computer-assisted procedure
in which individual trials were displayed on a video monitor. Conjugate
traces were calculated using the average of the calibrated right eye
and left eye horizontal signals. Trials were rejected if eye traces
were disturbed by blinks or if saccades occurred within 100 msec after
pursuit onset. Position traces were filtered and differentiated with a
single-pole analog filter with a cutoff frequency of 15 Hz. The onset
of pursuit was taken as the point when smooth eye velocity exceeded
3°/sec and continued to accelerate in the direction of the target
ramp. This point was verified by the experimenter for each trial. Thus,
though eye velocity during fixation occasionally exceeded the 3°/sec
threshold value, these spontaneous fluctuations above the threshold
value could be separated easily from the onset of pursuit tracking.
Average eye acceleration during pursuit initiation was then taken as
the value of smooth eye velocity at 100 msec after the pursuit onset.
 |
Results
|
|---|
Representative examples of the results from experiments 1 and 2,
in which vertical eye position was the contextual cue, are shown for
subject 3 in Figures 3
4
5
. Figure 3
compares tracking during the initial several hundred milliseconds of
pursuit, between the beginning and the end of the training period.
First, note the pattern of tracking with the decreasing paradigm when
the eyes were up 5° in the orbit. When training began (Fig. 3 ,
lefthand panels, Early in Training), the initial eye velocity at the
end of the open-loop period was commensurate with the initial target
velocity so that the eye then had to slow down to match the movement of
the target at its final (halved) velocity. At the end of the training
period, however, the acceleration and velocity during the initial few
hundred milliseconds of pursuit were less (Fig. 3
, lefthand
panels, Late in Training), indicating that the initial command for
pursuit had been modified toward the lower, second target speed. An
analogous pattern of change was observed with the increasing paradigm
when the eyes were down 5° in the orbit, only in this case (Fig. 3 ,
righthand panels) the acceleration and velocity during the initial few
hundred milliseconds of pursuit were greater at the end of the
training period. In sum, the results shown in Figure 3
indicate that
different patterns of adaptive changes in horizontal pursuit initiation
can be induced simultaneously and that the adaptive changes can even be
in the opposite sense, one for an increase and the other for a
decrease. Which adaptive change was invoked depended on the vertical
position of the eye in the orbit.

View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3. Representative pursuit traces from subject 3 during the training
session of experiment 1 (the initial velocity of the target was
leftward 23.3°/sec). Downward denotes leftward movement. The first
five and the last five trials during the training session are shown.
Left: decreasing paradigm with the eyes up 5°;
right: increasing paradigm with the eyes down 5°.
Top: position traces. Thick solid lines,
target movement; dashed lines, what target position
would have been if target velocity had not changed. In the decreasing
paradigm, initially during training the eye had to slow down
considerably. At the end of training period, however, the acceleration
in the open-loop period decreased, and eye velocity overshot target
velocity by much less. In the increasing paradigm, initially during
training the eye considerably lagged the target. At the end of the
training, however, the acceleration in the open-loop period increased,
and the eye did not lag the target by as much. Bottom:
velocity traces. The change in the acceleration in the open-loop period
is seen by comparing the slopes of the velocity traces.
|
|

View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4. The time course of change in the average acceleration in
the open-loop period from the same data shown in Figure 3
(subject 3,
experiment 1, left 23.3°/sec). Left: decreasing
paradigm with the eyes up 5°; right: increasing
paradigm with the eyes down 5°. Abscissa: trial
number; ordinate: average acceleration during the
initial 100 msec of pursuit tracking. Solid line, the
regression line. Left: average acceleration gradually
decreased; the change during 100 trials based on the first and last
values from the regression line was -14.4%; right:
average acceleration gradually increased, with the change being
47.1%.
|
|

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5. Comparison of acceleration of initial 100 msec between preadaptation
session ( ) and postadaptation ( ) session from subject 3,
experiment 2. Left: up gaze, increasing paradigm;
right: down gaze, decreasing paradigm. On the
y-axis is the average acceleration during the initial
100 msec of tracking. R1, right tracking, lower target speed; R2, right
tracking, higher target speed; L1, left tracking, lower target speed;
L2, left tracking, higher target speed.
|
|
Figure 4
shows the changes in average acceleration in the first 100 msec of
tracking during the same adaptation session for which data are shown in
Figure 3
. As expected, for tracking in up gaze the average acceleration
gradually decreased, whereas for tracking in down gaze it gradually
increased. To quantify this change, we fit a regression line to the
data and used the fitted values at the beginning and the end of
training to compute a percentage change, which is also shown in Figure 4
. For this particular record, the change was -11.4% (correlation
coefficient = 0.24, n = 32, P =
0.19) for up gaze and +47.1% (0.57, n = 36,
P < 0.0001) for down gaze.
The effects of training could also be seen when comparing pretraining
and posttraining values of average acceleration in the open-loop
period. Figure 5
shows examples from subject 3 while looking up (right panel) and down
(left panel), for two different initial target speeds. Again, there was
a change in average acceleration in the open-loop period that was
specific to the vertical position of the eye in which the training took
place.
Figure 6
summarizes the adaptive change in average acceleration in the open-loop
period for all subjects and experiments. These numbers were obtained
from the slope of the regression line during the entire adaptation
session as was calculated for the data presented in Figure 4
. Although
the general pattern of response was qualitatively similar among all
subjectsthe adaptive response in the initial acceleration of
horizontal tracking depended on vertical eye position, there were
quantitative differences. In both experiments 1 and 2, different
amounts of adaptation occurred, depending on whether the subject was
looking up or down. The mean difference between the adaptation values
for looking up and down, for the corresponding trial type for each
subject is given in the right upper corner of each panel. For
experiment 1, a large increase in acceleration was seen during down
gaze in subjects 1 and 3, and a large decrease in acceleration was seen
during up gaze in subject 2. For subject 4, the overall adaptive
changes were smaller, and there was little difference in the amount
between up and down gaze. There was a statistically significant
difference using the paired t-test between corresponding
trial types for all cases (P = 0.0004,
n = 16). The percentage differences for experiment 1
ranged between 15.9% and 37.7%. On average, the difference was 26.6%
for all cases. In experiment 2, acceleration was increased for looking
upward and decreased for looking downward in subjects 2 and 3. In
subjects 1 and 4, the decrease in acceleration was greater for looking
down. There was a statistically significant difference using the paired
t-test between corresponding trial types for all cases
(P < 0.001, n = 16). The percentage
differences for experiment 2 ranged between 11.3% and 55.1%. On
average, the difference was 33.4% for all cases.

View larger version (51K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 6. Change in acceleration of initial 100 msec during adaptation session,
which is percentage change in accelerations as calculated from the
slope of linear regressions performed on acceleration as a function of
trial number. Left, middle, and right
panels: experiments 1, 2, and 3, respectively; Nos. 1, 2, 3,
and 4 denote subjects. Left and middle
panels: left bars are for up 5° and
right bars are for down 5° in order of left
23.3°/sec (L2), left 15.6°/sec (L1), right 15.6°/sec (R1), and
right 23.3°/sec (R2) as initial target velocity. Right
panels: left bars are for red target, and
right bars are for green target in the same order.
Upward arrow, increasing paradigm; downward
arrow, decreasing paradigm. The number in the right
upper corner of each panel indicates mean difference of
percentage change in accelerations for the corresponding four trial
types.
|
|
In experiment 3, a similar analysis is presented; in this case
adaptation is compared with the contextual cue being the color of the
target. There was little difference in adaptation between the red
target and green targets in this experiment (on average 3.0%), and the
differences were not significant (P = 0.47,
n = 16). This result indicates that unlike vertical
orbital position, target color alone is not an effective cue for
context-specific pursuit adaptation.
 |
Discussion
|
|---|
The main finding of this study is that for smooth pursuit,
multiple relationships between the value of eye acceleration in the
initial open-loop period of tracking and the velocity of the target can
be learned simultaneously and gated in and out according to a
contextual cue. Our specific paradigm linked horizontal pursuit to
vertical eye position and called for an increase in eye acceleration in
one vertical eye position and a decrease in the other. Although the
responses were not always tailored exactly to the combinations of
stimuli presented, in all cases the general pattern of the response,
that is, a relatively greater increase in pursuit acceleration when an
increase in acceleration was called for in a particular vertical eye
position or a relatively greater decrease in pursuit acceleration when
a decrease in acceleration was called for in a particular vertical eye
position, conformed to the requirements of the stimulus. Considering
how brief the training period was and how close the contextual cues for
vertical eye position were (they were separated by only 10°, so that
learning in one position could have interfered with learning in the
other), the context-specific effect was robust and unequivocal. The
finding of context-driven learning for smooth pursuit is not surprising
because such learning has already been demonstrated in other open-loop
eye movement subsystems that have been shown to be under adaptive
control, such as the vestibulo-ocular reflex15
19
23
and
saccades.16
17
18
20
21
22
24
Likewise vertical eye position
has also been shown to be an effective cue for context-specific
adaptation of the horizontal vestibulo-ocular reflex14
and
for horizontal saccades.21
We also found, however, that
unlike eye position, target color was not an effective cue for context
specific adaptation. A similar dichotomy has been reported previously
for context-specific learning in saccades.17
At first glance, one would think that the eye position cue is
"closer" than the color cue and perhaps more necessary to the
central mechanisms that generate pursuit eye movements. Premotor
commands for all types of eye movements must take into account eye
position in the orbit because of the nonlinear relationship between eye
muscle strength and orbital position.25
Adaptation in the
presence of a weak muscle, for example, must be orbital-position
specific.6
One can ask, however, why would vertical eye
position be important for horizontal pursuit adaptation because the
change in the cue itselfthe position of the eye in the orbitis
orthogonal to the direction of eye motion that must be recalibrated.
One possible explanation is that in natural circumstances targets
rarely move across the visual field in a purely horizontal or vertical
direction (i.e., relative to the orbit) but rather have an oblique
component. With a change in vertical eye position, the innervation to
produce the horizontal component of pursuit might have to be modified,
because the pulling directions of the horizontal muscles change with
the vertical position of the eye in the orbit. Thus, vertical eye
position could be an important cue for generating the correct
horizontal component of pursuit, as the eye traverses an oblique
trajectory. Another possible factor would be if smooth pursuit learning
were applied in polar rather than Cartesian coordinates and so
generalize to target (and eye) trajectories with vectors that were
slightly oblique relative to the training direction.7
26
This spread of adaptation to target trajectories that differ in their
direction from the training axis has also been shown to be the case for
saccade adaptation.16
22
In this case, too, vertical eye
position would become an important cue for the horizontal component of
eye motion and would be expected to influence adaptive responses even
to purely horizontal target motion. With respect to both these ideas,
it would have been of interest to test oblique tracking before and
after training even though the adaptive stimuli were for pure
horizontally directed target and eye motion.
Finally, it has been reported that the initial "open-loop
component" of pursuit is kept accurate regardless of the starting
position of the eye in the orbit,27
although the same is
not true for the closed-loop sustained portion of tracking in which
there are changes in accuracy that depend on orbital
position.28
Presumably, accuracy in the initial phase of
pursuit tracking is the most critical for object identification, so
that the open-loop period is always being calibrated as precisely as
possible.
Why was target color not an effective cue? Other studies of adaptation
have shown that cues apart from eye position can be used to guide
ocular motor learning, such as frames on/off for eye
glasses13
and conditional adaptation (with the
experimental setting itself becoming the contextual
cue).14
17
Perhaps color is too remote from the functional
motor mechanisms underlying accurate pursuit and might not work without
a much longer training period. In a sense, though, the inability of
target color to serve as a contextual cue for pursuit learning in our
short-term learning paradigm indicates that mental effort alone, to
increase or decrease gain, is not the cause of separate adaptive
responses in experiments 1 and 2. Taken together with the
nonpredictability of the direction and the velocity of the target, the
changes in the very early part of the pursuit response cannot be
explained by a simple higher-level cognitive strategy such as
"anticipation," "intention," or "prediction."
What might be the neural mechanisms underlying context-specific
adaptation for smooth pursuit? For the type of cue used here, vertical
eye position, a likely locus is the cerebellum. The cerebellar cortex,
including the dorsal vermis12
and the flocculus or ventral
paraflocculus,29
has been implicated in pursuit
adaptation, and with its rich supply of visual and eye position
information (both proprioceptive afference and efference
copy),30
31
the cerebellar cortex is ideally poised to
recognize contexts that could be used to gate the corrective adaptive
response. Such a role for the cerebellum in pursuit adaptation does not
preclude a role for other structures, either in the type of learning
demonstrated in our study or in higher-level more cognitively driven
adaptation. Deubel17
has shown, for example, that learning
in the saccadic system can be specific to the type of saccade, be it to
a novel stimulus, to a remembered target, or self-generated. It remains
to be shown how the cerebellum and other cerebral structures, including
the thalamus, basal ganglia, and cerebral cortex, contribute to ocular
motor learning in general and context-specific learning in particular.
 |
Footnotes
|
|---|
Supported by Grant-in-Aid 09771413 for Encouragement of Young Scientists (MT), Scientific Research Grant 11671727 (the Japan Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture), National Institutes of Health Grant R01-EY01849, and NASA through Cooperative Agreement NCC 9-58 with the National Biomedical Research Institute (DSZ).
Submitted for publication January 26, 2000; revised June 5, 2000; accepted July 5, 2000.
Commercial relationships policy: N.
Corresponding author: Mineo Takagi, Department of Ophthalmology, Niigata University School of Medicine, 1 Asahimachi, Niigata 951-8510, Japan. mtakagi{at}med.niigata-u.ac.jp
 |
References
|
|---|
-
Rashbass, C. (1961) The relationship between saccadic and smooth pursuit tracking eye movements J Physiol 159,326-338
-
Lisberger, SG, Evinger, C, Johanson, GW, Fuchs, AF (1981) Relationship between eye acceleration and retinal image velocity during foveal smooth pursuit in man and monkey J Neurophysiol 46,229-249[Free Full Text]
-
Miller, JM, Anstis, T, Templeton, WB (1981) Saccadic plasticity: parametric adaptive control by retinal feedback J Exp Psychol 7,356-366
-
Semmlow, JL, Gauthier, GM, Vercher, JL (1989) Mechanism of short-term saccadic adaptation J Exp Psychol 15,249-258
-
Berthoz, A, Melvill, Johns G (1985) Adaptive mechanisms in gaze control Reviews in Oculomotor Research 1 Elsevier Science Amsterdam.
-
Optican, LM, Zee, DS, Chu, FC (1985) Adaptive response to ocular muscle weakness in human pursuit and saccadic eye movements J Neurophysiol 54,110-122[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kahlon, M, Lisberger, SG (1995) Coordinate system for learning in the smooth pursuit eye movements of monkeys J Neurosci 15,7270-7283[Abstract]
-
Carl, JR, Gellman, RS. (1986) Adaptive responses in human smooth pursuit. Advance in the biosciences. Vol. 57 Keller, EL Zee, DS eds. Adaptive Process in Visual and Oculomotor Systems ,335-339 Pergamon Press Oxford.
-
Fukushima, K, Tanaka, M, Suzuki, Y, Fukushima, J, Yoshida, T. (1996) Adaptive change in human smooth pursuit eye movement Neurosci Res 25,391-398[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Ogawa, T, Fujita, M. (1997) Adaptive modifications of human postsaccadic pursuit eye movements induced by a step-ramp-ramp paradigm Exp Brain Res 116,83-96[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Scheuerer, W, Ditterich, J, Straube, A. (1999) Adaptation of initial smooth-pursuit eye velocity in humans Neuro-ophthalmology 21,223-231
-
Takagi, M, Zee, DS, Tamargo, R. (2000) Effect of lesions of the oculomotor vermis on eye movements in primate: smooth pursuit J Neurophysiol 83,2047-2062[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Oohira, A, Zee, DS, Guyton, DL (1991) Disconjugate adaptation to long-standing, large amplitude, spectacle-corrected anisometropia Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 32,1693-1703[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Shelhamer, M, Robinson, DA, Tan, HS (1992) Context-specific adaptation of the gain of the vestibulo-ocular reflex in humans J Vestib Res 2,89-96[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Tiliket, C, Shelhamer, M, Tan, HS, Zee, DS (1993) Adaptation of the vestibuloocular reflex with the head in different orientations and positions relative to the axis of body rotation J Vestib Res 3,181-196[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Frens, MA, van Opstal, AJ (1994) Transfer of short-term adaptation in human saccade eye movement Exp Brain Res 100,293-306[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Deubel, H. (1995) Is saccadic adaptation context-specific? Findlay, JM Kentridge, RW Walker, R eds. Eye Movement Research: Mechanism, Processes and Applications ,177-187 Elsevier Science Amsterdam.
-
Straube, A, Fuchs, AF, Usher, S, Robinson, FR (1997) Characteristics of saccadic gain adaptation in rhesus macaques J Neurophysiol 77,874-895[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kramer, PD, Shelhamer, M, Peng, GCY, Zee, DS (1998) Context-specific short-term adaptation of the phase of the vestibulo-ocular reflex Exp Brain Res 120,184-192[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Scudder, CA, Batourina, EY, Tunder, GS (1998) Comparison of two methods of producing adaptation of saccade size and implications for the site of plasticity J Neurophysiol 79,704-715[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Clendaniel, RA, Shelhamer, MJ, Roberts, T. (1999) Context specific adaptation of saccade gain Soc Neurosci Abstr 25,658
-
Noto, CT, Watanabe, S, Fuchs, AF (1999) Characteristics of simian adaptation fields produced by behavioral changes in saccade size and direction J Neurophysiol 81,2798-2813[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Maxwell, JS, Schor, CM (1999) Adaptation of torsional eye alignment in relation to head roll Vision Res 39,4192-4199[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Watanabe, S, Noto, CT, Fuchs, AF (2000) Flexibility of saccade adaptation in the monkey: different gain states for saccades in the same direction Exp. Brain Res. 130,169-176[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Collins, CC, Carlson, MR, Scott, AB, Jampolsky, A. (1981) Extraocular muscle forces in normal human subjects Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 20,652-664[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kahlon, M, Lisberger, SG (1999) Vector averaging occurs downstream from learning in smooth pursuit eye movements of monkeys J Neurosci 19,9039-9053[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Mann, CA, Morrow, MJ (1997) Effects of eye and head position on horizontal and vertical smooth pursuit Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 38,773-779[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Yee, RD, Goldberg, RA, Johns, OW, Baloh, RW, Honrubia, V. (1983) Effect of eccentric gaze on pursuit Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 24,1108-1114[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Nagao, S, Kitazawa, K. (1998) Differences of responsiveness to step-ramp smooth pursuit eye movements in the primate flocculus and ventral paraflocculus Neurosci Res (Suppl) 22,316
-
Baker, R, Precht, W, Llinas, R. (1972) Mossy and climbing fiber projections of extraocular muscle afferents to the cerebellum Brain Res 38,440-445[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
-
Noda, H, Warabi, T. (1982) Eye position signals in the flocculus of the monkey during smooth-pursuit eye movements J Neurophysiol 324,187-202
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. T. Avila, L. E. Hong, A. Moates, K. A. Turano, and G. K. Thaker
Role of Anticipation in Schizophrenia-Related Pursuit Initiation Deficits
J Neurophysiol,
February 1, 2006;
95(2):
593 - 601.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. Alahyane and D. Pelisson
Eye Position Specificity of Saccadic Adaptation
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.,
January 1, 2004;
45(1):
123 - 130.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. Madelain and R. J. Krauzlis
Effects of Learning on Smooth Pursuit During Transient Disappearance of a Visual Target
J Neurophysiol,
August 1, 2003;
90(2):
972 - 982.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|