Understanding How the Brain Changes Its Mind: Microstimulation in the Macaque Frontal Eye Field Reveals How Saccade Plans Are Changed

Accumulator models that integrate incoming sensory information into motor plans provide a robust framework to understand decision making. However, their applicability to situations that demand a change of plan raises an interesting problem for the brain. This is because interruption of the current motor plan must occur by a competing motor plan, which is necessarily weaker in strength. To understand how changes of mind get expressed in behavior, we used a version of the double-step task called the redirect task, in which monkeys were trained to modify a saccade plan. We microstimulated the frontal eye fields during redirect behavior and systematically measured the deviation of the evoked saccade from the response field to causally track the changing saccade plan. Further, to identify the underlying mechanisms, eight different computational models of redirect behavior were assessed. It was observed that the model that included an independent, spatially specific inhibitory process, in addition to the two accumulators representing the preparatory processes of initial and final motor plans, best predicted the performance and the pattern of saccade deviation profile in the task. Such an inhibitory process suppressed the preparation of the initial motor plan, allowing the final motor plan to proceed unhindered. Thus, changes of mind are consistent with the notion of a spatially specific, inhibitory process that inhibits the current inappropriate plan, allowing expression of the new plan.

Queuing of concurrent movement plans by Basal Ganglia

How the brain converts parallel representations of movement goals into sequential movements is not known. We tested the role of basal ganglia (BG) in the temporal control of movement sequences by a convergent approach involving inactivation of the BG by muscimol injections into the caudate nucleus of monkeys and assessing behavior of Parkinson's disease patients, performing a modified double-step saccade task. We tested a critical prediction of a class of competitive queuing models that explains serial behavior as the outcome of a selection of concurrently activated goals. In congruence with these models, we found that inactivation or impairment of the BG unmasked the parallel nature of goal representations such that a significantly greater extent of averaged saccades, curved saccades, and saccade sequence errors were observed. These results suggest that the BG perform a form of competitive queuing, holding the second movement plan in abeyance while the first movement is being executed, allowing the proper temporal control of movement sequences.

Why Economists Reject Long-Term Fisheries Management Plans?

Most fisheries agencies conduct biological and economic assessments independently. This independent conduct may lead to situations in which economists reject management plans proposed by biologists. The objective of this study is to show how to find optimal strategies that may satisfy biologists and economists' conditions. In particular we characterize optimal fishing trajectories that maximize the present value of a discounted economic indicator taking into account the age-structure of the population as in stock assessment methodologies. This approach is applied to the Northern Stock of Hake. Our main empirical findings are: i) Optimal policy may be far away from any of the classical scenarios proposed by biologists, ii) The more the future is discounted, the higher the likelihood of finding contradictions among scenarios proposed by biologists and conclusions from economic analysis, iii) Optimal management reduces the risk of the stock falling under precautionary levels, especially if the future is not discounted to much, and iv) Optimal stationary fishing rate may be very different depending on the economic indicator used as reference.

What lies beneath: responding to forest development plans: a guide for First Nations

pdf contains 60 pages

Science-based restoration monitoring of coastal habitats, Volume One: A framework for monitoring plans under the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000 (Public Law 160-457)

Executive Summary: The Estuary Restoration Act of 2000 (ERA), Title I of the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000, was created to promote the restoration of habitats along the coast of the United States (including the US protectorates and the Great Lakes). The NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science was charged with the development of a guidance manual for monitoring plans under this Act. This guidance manual, titled Science-Based Restoration Monitoring of Coastal Habitats, is written in two volumes. It provides technical assistance, outlines necessary steps, and provides useful tools for the development and implementation of sound scientific monitoring of coastal restoration efforts. In addition, this manual offers a means to detect early warnings that the restoration is on track or not, to gauge how well a restoration site is functioning, to coordinate projects and efforts for consistent and successful restoration, and to evaluate the ecological health of specific coastal habitats both before and after project completion (Galatowitsch et al. 1998). The following habitats have been selected for discussion in this manual: water column, rock bottom, coral reefs, oyster reefs, soft bottom, kelp and other macroalgae, rocky shoreline, soft shoreline, submerged aquatic vegetation, marshes, mangrove swamps, deepwater swamps, and riverine forests. The classification of habitats used in this document is generally based on that of Cowardin et al. (1979) in their Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, as called for in the ERA Estuary Habitat Restoration Strategy. This manual is not intended to be a restoration monitoring “cookbook” that provides templates of monitoring plans for specific habitats. The interdependence of a large number of site-specific factors causes habitat types to vary in physical and biological structure within and between regions and geographic locations (Kusler and Kentula 1990). Monitoring approaches used should be tailored to these differences. However, even with the diversity of habitats that may need to be restored and the extreme geographic range across which these habitats occur, there are consistent principles and approaches that form a common basis for effective monitoring. Volume One, titled A Framework for Monitoring Plans under the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000, begins with definitions and background information. Topics such as restoration, restoration monitoring, estuaries, and the role of socioeconomics in restoration are discussed. In addition, the habitats selected for discussion in this manual are briefly described. (PDF contains 116 pages)

Southern California Baseline Studies and Analysis: 1975-1978. Master Table of Contents

This is only the table of contents for a series of technical reports done from 1975-1978. The papers were done on contract for BLM by a number of universities and consulting firms such as Science Applications, Inc., University of Southern California, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, Moss Landing Marine Laboratories, and various campuses of University of California and California State University. (PDF contains 36 pages)

Panama City Fisheries Resources Office: FY 2006 Annual Report

HIGHLIGHTS FOR FY 2006 1. Captured and tagged 475 Gulf sturgeons in five Florida rivers and one bay. 2. Documented Gulf sturgeon marine movement and habitat use in the Gulf of Mexico. 3. Assisted the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) with the collection of Gulf sturgeon, implantation of acoustic tags, and monitoring of fish in a study to examine movement patterns and habitat use in Pensacola and Choctawhatchee bays post-Hurricane Ivan. 4. Provided technical assistance to Jon “Bo” Sawyer in completing a study – Summer Resting Areas of the Gulf Sturgeon in the Conecuh/Escambia River System, Alabama-Florida – for acquiring a Degree of Master of Science at Troy University, Alabama. 5. Coordinated tagging and data collection with NOAA observers aboard trawlers while collecting Gulf sturgeon during dredging operations in the coastal Gulf of Mexico. 6. Hosted the 7th Annual Gulf Sturgeon Workshop. 7. Implemented Gulf Striped Bass Restoration Plan by coordinating the 23rd Annual Morone Workshop, leading the technical committee, transporting broodfish, coordinating the stocking on the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river system, and evaluating post-stocking success. 8. Continued updating and managing the Freshwater Mussel Survey Database, a Geographic Information System (GIS) database, for over 800 unique sites in the Northeast Gulf (NEG) drainages in Alabama (AL), Georgia (GA), and Florida (FL). 9. Formed a recovery implementation team for listed mussels in the ACF river basin and oversaw grant cooperative agreements for 14 listed and candidate freshwater mussels in the NEG watersheds. 10. Initiated a project in the Apalachicola River to relocate mussels stranded as a result of drought conditions, and calculate river flows at which mussels would be exposed. 11. Initiated a project in Sawhatchee Creek, Georgia to determine the status of threatened and endangered (T&E) freshwater mussels and target restoration projects, population assessments, and potential population augmentation to lead toward recovery of the listed species. 12. Initiated a study to determine the age and growth of the endangered fat threeridge mussel (Amblema neislerii). 13. Provided technical assistance to the Panama City Ecological Services office for a biological opinion on the operations of Jim Woodruff Lock and Dam and its effects on the listed species and designated and proposed critical habitat in the Apalachicola River, Florida. 14. Assisted with a multi-State, inter-agency team to develop a management plan to restore the Alabama shad in the ACF river system. 15. Conducted fishery surveys on Tyndall AFB, Florida and Ft. Benning, Georgia and completed a report with recommendations for future recreational fishery needs. 16. Provided fishery technical assistance to four National Wildlife Refuges (NWR) (i.e., Okefenokee NWR, Banks Lake NWR, St. Vincent NWR, and St. Marks NWR). 17. Initiated an Aquatic Resources and Recreation Fishing Survey on Department of Defense facilities located in Region 4. 18. Identified 130 road-stream crossings on Eglin AFB for rehabilitation and elimination of sediment imputs. 19. Continued the Aquatics Monitoring Program at Eglin AFB to assess techniques that determine current status and sustainability of aquatic habitat and develop a measure to determine quality or degradation of habitat. 20. Assisted Eglin AFB Natural Resource managers in revising the installation’s Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) and its associated component plans. 21. Coordinated recovery efforts for the endangered Okaloosa darter including population/life history surveys, stream restoration, and outreach activities. 22. Initiated a comprehensive status review of the Okaloosa darter with analyses performed to assess available habitat, preferred habitats, range expansions/reductions/fragmentations, population size, and probability of extinction. 23. Assisted the Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) under a Memorandum of Agreement to develop conservation strategies, implement monitoring and assessment programs, and secure funds for aquatic management programs in six watersheds in northwest Florida and southeast Alabama. 24. Entered into a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Air Force to encourage the conservation and rehabilitation of natural resources at Hurlburt Field, Florida. 25. Multiple outreach projects were completed to detail aquatic resources’ conservation needs and opportunities; including National Fishing Week, Earth Day, several festivals, and school outreach.