Division of labor in frontal eye field neurons during presaccadic remapping of visual receptive fields.

Our percept of visual stability across saccadic eye movements may be mediated by presaccadic remapping. Just before a saccade, neurons that remap become visually responsive at a future field (FF), which anticipates the saccade vector. Hence, the neurons use corollary discharge of saccades. Many of the neurons also decrease their response at the receptive field (RF). Presaccadic remapping occurs in several brain areas including the frontal eye field (FEF), which receives corollary discharge of saccades in its layer IV from a collicular-thalamic pathway. We studied, at two levels, the microcircuitry of remapping in the FEF. At the laminar level, we compared remapping between layers IV and V. At the cellular level, we compared remapping between different neuron types of layer IV. In the FEF in four monkeys (Macaca mulatta), we identified 27 layer IV neurons with orthodromic stimulation and 57 layer V neurons with antidromic stimulation from the superior colliculus. With the use of established criteria, we classified the layer IV neurons as putative excitatory (n = 11), putative inhibitory (n = 12), or ambiguous (n = 4). We found that just before a saccade, putative excitatory neurons increased their visual response at the RF, putative inhibitory neurons showed no change, and ambiguous neurons increased their visual response at the FF. None of the neurons showed presaccadic visual changes at both RF and FF. In contrast, neurons in layer V showed full remapping (at both the RF and FF). Our data suggest that elemental signals for remapping are distributed across neuron types in early cortical processing and combined in later stages of cortical microcircuitry.

Selectivity of physiotherapist programs in the United States does not differ by institutional funding source or research activity level.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare selectivity characteristics among institution characteristics to determine differences by institutional funding source (public vs. private) or research activity level (research vs. non-research). METHODS: This study included information provided by the Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education (CAPTE) and the Federation of State Boards of Physical Therapy. Data were extracted from all students who graduated in 2011 from accredited physical therapy programs in the United States. The public and private designations of the institutions were extracted directly from the classifications from the 'CAPTE annual accreditation report,' and high and low research activity was determined based on Carnegie classifications. The institutions were classified into four groups: public/research intensive, public/non-research intensive, private/research intensive, and private/non-research intensive. Descriptive and comparison analyses with post hoc testing were performed to determine whether there were statistically significant differences among the four groups. RESULTS: Although there were statistically significant baseline grade point average differences among the four categorized groups, there were no significant differences in licensure pass rates or for any of the selectivity variables of interest. CONCLUSION: Selectivity characteristics did not differ by institutional funding source (public vs. private) or research activity level (research vs. non-research). This suggests that the concerns about reduced selectivity among physiotherapy programs, specifically the types that are experiencing the largest proliferation, appear less warranted.