MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951207938 · doi:10.1152/jn.00078.2019

Recovery of contralesional saccade choice and reaction time deficits after a unilateral endothelin-1-induced lesion in the macaque caudal prefrontal cortex

2019· article· en· W2951207938 on OpenAlexafffund
Ramina Adam, Kevin Johnston, Stefan Everling

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNeuroscienceLesionPsychologySaccadeMacaqueStimulus (psychology)Prefrontal cortexEye movementCognitionCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The caudal primate prefrontal cortex (PFC) is involved in target selection and visually guided saccades through both covert attention and overt orienting eye movements. Unilateral damage to the caudal PFC often leads to decreased awareness of a contralesional target alone, referred to as “neglect,” or when it is presented simultaneously with an ipsilesional target, referred to as “extinction.” In the current study, we examined whether deficits in contralesional target selection were due to contralesional oculomotor deficits, such as slower reaction times. We experimentally induced a focal ischemic lesion in the right caudal PFC of 4 male macaque monkeys using the vasoconstrictor endothelin-1 and measured saccade choice and reaction times on double-stimulus free-choice tasks and single-stimulus trials before and after the lesion. We found that 1) endothelin-1-induced lesions in the caudal PFC produced contralesional target selection deficits that varied in severity and duration based on lesion volume and location; 2) contralesional neglect-like deficits were transient and recovered by week 4 postlesion; 3) contralesional extinction-like deficits were longer lasting and recovered by weeks 8–16 postlesion; 4) contralesional reaction time returned to baseline well before the contralesional choice deficit had recovered; and 5) neither the mean reaction times nor the reaction time distributions could account for the degree of contralesional extinction on the free-choice task throughout recovery. These findings demonstrate that the saccade choice bias observed after a right caudal PFC lesion is not exclusively due to contralesional motor deficits, but instead reflects a combination of impaired motor and attentional processing. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Unilateral damage to the caudal prefrontal cortex in macaque monkeys results in impaired contralesional target selection during the simultaneous presentation of an ipsilesional target. We show that the recovery of contralesional target selection cannot be explained by the recovery of prolonged contralesional saccadic reaction times alone. This indicates that an impairment in contralesional attentional processing contributes to the magnitude of the saccade choice bias in the weeks following a unilateral caudal prefrontal cortex lesion.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric DysfunctionFrench-language works237,207