@article {1678, title = {Motion dependence of smooth pursuit eye movements in the marmoset.}, journal = {J Neurophysiol}, volume = {113}, year = {2015}, month = {2015 Jun 01}, pages = {3954-60}, abstract = {

Smooth pursuit eye movements stabilize slow-moving objects on the retina by matching eye velocity with target velocity. Two critical components are required to generate smooth pursuit: first, because it is a voluntary eye movement, the subject must select a target to pursue to engage the tracking system; and second, generating smooth pursuit requires a moving stimulus. We examined whether this behavior also exists in the common marmoset, a New World primate that is increasingly attracting attention as a genetic model for mental disease and systems neuroscience. We measured smooth pursuit in two marmosets, previously trained to perform fixation tasks, using the standard Rashbass step-ramp pursuit paradigm. We first measured the aspects of visual motion that drive pursuit eye movements. Smooth eye movements were in the same direction as target motion, indicating that pursuit was driven by target movement rather than by displacement. Both the open-loop acceleration and closed-loop eye velocity exhibited a linear relationship with target velocity for slow-moving targets, but this relationship declined for higher speeds. We next examined whether marmoset pursuit eye movements depend on an active engagement of the pursuit system by measuring smooth eye movements evoked by small perturbations of motion from fixation or during pursuit. Pursuit eye movements were much larger during pursuit than from fixation, indicating that pursuit is actively gated. Several practical advantages of the marmoset brain, including the accessibility of the middle temporal (MT) area and frontal eye fields at the cortical surface, merit its utilization for studying pursuit movements.

}, keywords = {Acceleration, Animals, Callithrix, Motion, Motion Perception, Photic Stimulation, Pursuit, Smooth, Retina, Visual Fields}, issn = {1522-1598}, doi = {10.1152/jn.00197.2015}, author = {Mitchell, Jude F and Priebe, Nicholas J and Miller, Cory T} } @article {188, title = {Static sound timing alters sensitivity to low-level visual motion.}, journal = {J Vis}, volume = {12}, year = {2012}, month = {2012}, abstract = {

Visual motion processing is essential to survival in a dynamic world and is probably the best-studied facet of visual perception. It has been recently discovered that the timing of brief static sounds can bias visual motion perception, an effect attributed to "temporal ventriloquism" whereby the timing of the sounds "captures" the timing of the visual events. To determine whether this cross-modal interaction is dependent on the involvement of higher-order attentive tracking mechanisms, we used near-threshold motion stimuli that isolated low-level pre-attentive visual motion processing. We found that the timing of brief sounds altered sensitivity to these visual motion stimuli in a manner that paralleled changes in the timing of the visual stimuli. Our findings indicate that auditory timing impacts visual motion processing very early in the processing hierarchy and without the involvement of higher-order attentional and/or position tracking mechanisms.

}, keywords = {Acoustic Stimulation, Attention, Auditory Perception, Humans, Motion Perception, Photic Stimulation, Sound, Time Perception}, issn = {1534-7362}, doi = {10.1167/12.11.2}, author = {Kafaligonul, Hulusi and Stoner, Gene R} } @article {187, title = {Auditory modulation of visual apparent motion with short spatial and temporal intervals.}, journal = {J Vis}, volume = {10}, year = {2010}, month = {2010}, pages = {31}, abstract = {

Recently, E. Freeman and J. Driver (2008) reported a cross-modal temporal interaction in which brief sounds drive the perceived direction of visual apparent-motion, an effect they attributed to "temporal capture" of the visual stimuli by the sounds (S. Morein-Zamir, S. Soto-Faraco, \& A. Kingstone, 2003). Freeman and Driver used "long-range" visual motion stimuli, which travel over long spatial and temporal intervals and engage high-order cortical areas (K. G. Claeys, D. T. Lindsey, E. De Schutter, \& G. A. Orban, 2003; Y. Zhuo et al., 2003). We asked whether Freeman and Driver{\textquoteright}s temporal effects extended to the short-range apparent-motion stimuli that engage cortical area MT, a lower-order area with well-established spatiotemporal selectivity for visual motion (e.g. A. Mikami, 1991, 1992; A. Mikami, W. T. Newsome, \& R. H. Wurtz, 1986a, 1986b; W. T. Newsome, A. Mikami, \& R. H. Wurtz, 1986). Consistent with a temporal-capture account, we found that static sounds bias the perception of both the direction (Experiment 1) and the speed (Experiment 2) of short-range motion. Our results suggest that auditory timing may interact with visual spatiotemporal processing as early as cortical area MT. Examination of the neuronal responses of this well-studied area to the stimuli used in this study would provide a test and might provide insight into the neuronal representation of time.

}, keywords = {Acoustic Stimulation, Auditory Perception, Humans, Motion Perception, Photic Stimulation, Temporal Lobe, Time Perception, Visual Cortex}, issn = {1534-7362}, doi = {10.1167/10.12.31}, author = {Kafaligonul, Hulusi and Stoner, Gene R} }