PubMed HealthSearch

Biomedical subjects

D F Lindsley

Publications and source records attributed to D F Lindsley.

14 recordsLinked to original sources

Pulvinar neuron responses to spontaneous and trained eye movements and to light flashes in squirrel monkeys.

Single unit responses were recorded in the pulvinar nucleus of the squirrel monkey (Saimiri sciureus) while awake and alert, with the head fixed but free to make eye movements. Peri-saccadic time histograms revealed only post-saccadic responses to eye movements made spontaneously in the dark or in a uniformly illuminated field (Ganzfeld), or to trained eye movements made in response to a spot of light in the periphery. Of 120 pulvinar neurons that responded to eye movements in the light, approximately one-quarter was responsive to eye movements in the dark. In one group of monkeys about half of the eye movement-responsive cells in the light were responsive to light flash in the dark; in another group approximately half of the eye movement-responsive cells in the light were also responsive to trained eye movements. Of particular interest is the fact that pulvinar neurons responsive to eye movements were located within a restricted region oriented vertically and cutting across lateral and inferior pulvinar, rostrally, and lateral and medial pulvinar, caudally. The results have been interpreted as supporting the concept of convergence and integration of visual and oculomotor input in the pulvinar and also its potential role in the mediation of visual attention.

Animals

Single unit analysis of auditory processing in squirrel monkey frontal cortex.

Clicks, tone bursts and species-specific vocalizations were used to test 315 units isolated in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Acoustic responses were detected in about 20% of the units. Responsive units were scattered throughout the explored area, although more units responsive to vocalizations were found in the vicinity of sulcus principalis. Vocalizations were effective stimuli, driving 68% of the acoustic units. However, only 19% responded exclusively to vocalizations. Clicks were effective for 65% of the acoustic units, 27% of which responded only to clicks. Tones activated 39% of the acoustic units. Units generally responded to tones over a wide frequency range. Responses to tones, clicks and vocalization were similar, both within the same unit and between units. The biggest difference related to the background activity of the unit: Low rate cells produced a small number of relatively well-timed discharges per stimulus; high rate cells produced a longer, more poorly-timed response. Vocalizations differed in their effectiveness according to their physical structure. Noisy calls elicited 69% of all responses, although they accounted for only one-third of the test vocalizations. We conclude that frontal acoustic units are involved with at least two functional mechanisms, one related to attending to a large class of sounds, the other related to the detection of sounds with high motivational significance.

Acoustic Stimulation