We compared the variability of the subjective visual vertical (SVV) and static ocular counterroll (OCR), and hypothesized a correlation between the measurements because of their shared macular input. SVV and OCR were measured simultaneously in various whole-body roll positions [upright, 45° right-ear down (RED), and 75° RED] in six subjects. Gains of OCR were −0.18 (45° RED) and −0.12 (75° RED), whereas gains of compensation for body roll in the SVV task were −1.11 (45° RED) and −0.96 (75° RED). Normalized SVV and OCR variabilities were not significantly different (P > 0.05), i.e., both increased with increasing roll. Moreover, a significant correlation (R2 = 0.80, slope = 0.29) between SVV and OCR variabilities was found. Whereas the gain of OCR is different from the gain of SVV, trial-to-trial variability of OCR follows the same roll-dependent modulation observed in SVV variability. We propose that the similarities in variability reflect a common otolith input, which, however, is subject to distinct central processing for determining the gain of SVV and OCR.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
The authors thank Albert Züger for technical assistance, Itsaso Olasagasti for statistical advice and Thomas Haslwanter for critically reading the manuscript. Funding was provided by the Swiss National Science Foundation (3200B0-105434), the Betty and David Koetser Foundation for Brain Research, Zurich, Switzerland, and the Center of Integrative Human Physiology, University of Zurich, Switzerland.
Anastasopoulos D, Bronstein A, Haslwanter T, Fetter M, Dichgans J (1999) The role of somatosensory input for the perception of verticality. Ann N Y Acad Sci 871:379–383PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angelaki DE, Cullen KE (2008) Vestibular system: the many facets of a multimodal sense. Annu Rev Neurosci 31:125–150PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aubert H (1861) Eine scheinbare bedeutende Drehung von Objekten bei Neigung des Kopfes nach rechts oder links. Virchows Arch 20:381–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergamin O, Bizzarri S, Straumann D (2002) Ocular torsion during voluntary blinks in humans. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 43:3438–3443PubMedGoogle Scholar
Bockisch CJ, Haslwanter T (2001) Three-dimensional eye position during static roll and pitch in humans. Vis Res 41:2127–2137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandt T, Dieterich M (1999) The vestibular cortex. Its locations, functions, and disorders. Ann N Y Acad Sci 871:293–312PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronstein AM (1999) The interaction of otolith and proprioceptive information in the perception of verticality. The effects of labyrinthine and CNS disease. Ann N Y Acad Sci 871:324–333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronstein AM, Yardley L, Moore AP, Cleeves L (1996) Visually and posturally mediated tilt illusion in Parkinson’s disease and in labyrinthine defective subjects. Neurology 47:651–656PubMedGoogle Scholar
Collewijn H, van der Steen J, Ferman L, Jansen TC (1985) Human ocular counterroll: assessment of static and dynamic properties from electromagnetic scleral coil recordings. Exp Brain Res 59:185–196PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford JD, Tweed DB, Vilis T (2003) Static ocular counterroll is implemented through the 3-D neural integrator. J Neurophysiol 90:2777–2784PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Graaf B, Bekkering H, Erasmus C, Bles W (1992) Influence of visual, vestibular, cervical, and somatosensory tilt information on ocular rotation and perception of the horizontal. J Vestib Res 2:15–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
De Vrijer M, Medendorp WP, Van Gisbergen JA (2008) Shared computational mechanism for tilt compensation accounts for biased verticality percepts in motion and pattern vision. J Neurophysiol 99:915–930PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond SG, Markham CH, Simpson NE, Curthoys IS (1979) Binocular counterrolling in humans during dynamic rotation. Acta Otolaryngol 87:490–498PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandez C, Goldberg JM, Abend WK (1972) Response to static tilts of peripheral neurons innervating otolith organs of the squirrel monkey. J Neurophysiol 35:978–987PubMedGoogle Scholar
Goonetilleke SC, Mezey LE, Burgess AM, Curthoys IS (2008) On the relation between ocular torsion and visual perception of line orientation. Vis Res 48:1488–1496PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graybiel A, Miller EF 2nd, Newsom BD, Kennedy RS (1968) The effect of water immersion on perception of the oculogravic illusion in normal and labyrinthine-defective subjects. Acta Otolaryngol 65:599–610PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haustein W (1989) Considerations on Listing's law and the primary position by means of a matrix description of eye position control. Biol Cybern 60:411–420PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar