Change in Motor Plan, Without a Change in the Spatial Locus of Attention, Modulates Activity in Posterior Parietal Cortex

Lawrence H. Snyder , Aaron P. Batista , and Richard A. Andersen Division of Biology, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125 Snyder, Lawrence H., Aaron P. Batista, and Richard A. Andersen. Change in motor plan, without a change in the spatial locus of attention, modulates acti...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of neurophysiology 1998-05, Vol.79 (5), p.2814-2819
Hauptverfasser: Snyder, Lawrence H, Batista, Aaron P, Andersen, Richard A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Lawrence H. Snyder , Aaron P. Batista , and Richard A. Andersen Division of Biology, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125 Snyder, Lawrence H., Aaron P. Batista, and Richard A. Andersen. Change in motor plan, without a change in the spatial locus of attention, modulates activity in posterior parietal cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 79: 2814-2819, 1998. The lateral intraparietal area (LIP) of macaque monkey, and a parietal reach region (PRR) medial and posterior to LIP, code the intention to make visually guided eye and arm movements, respectively. We studied the effect of changing the motor plan, without changing the locus of attention, on single neurons in these two areas. A central target was fixated while one or two sequential flashes occurred in the periphery. The first appeared either within the response field of the neuron being recorded or else on the opposite side of the fixation point. Animals planned a saccade (red flash) or reach (green flash) to the flash location. In some trials, a second flash 750 ms later could change the motor plan but never shifted attention: second flashes always occurred at the same location as the preceding first flash. Responses in LIP were larger when a saccade was instructed ( n  = 20 cells), whereas responses in PRR were larger when a reach was instructed ( n  = 17). This motor preference was observed for both first flashes and second flashes. In addition, the response to a second flash depended on whether it affirmed or countermanded the first flash; second flash responses were diminished only in the former case. Control experiments indicated that this differential effect was not due to stimulus novelty. These findings support a role for posterior parietal cortex in coding specific motor intention and are consistent with a possible role in the nonspatial shifting of motor intention.
ISSN:0022-3077
1522-1598
DOI:10.1152/jn.1998.79.5.2814