We welcome the chance to respond to the comments of Pouget and Valero-Cabre about our recent study (Gerits et al. 2011, Experimental Brain Research), which showed an impact of continuous theta burst (cTBS) transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over monkey frontal eye Welds (FEF) on prosaccade latency. No such eVect was observed when applying TBS over M1 instead, at a site 10–11 mm away from the eVective FEF site. We note that Pouget and Valero-Cabre acknowledge “the utmost importance” of extending TBS and other TMS protocols to animal models, as done in Gerits et al. (2011). They also state that “there is little doubt that Gerits et al. demonstrate for the Wrst time the feasibility of applying cTBS patterns to the awake monkey brain and record saccade behaviour immediately thereafter”. We share their enthusiasm for extending this approach with other TMS protocols, and in other behavioural and cognitive paradigms. Like them, we anticipate that larger eVects are there to be found and that TBS/TMS work in non-human primates may ultimately go well beyond what is known from human studies. Pouget and Valero-Cabre comment several times on the small absolute size of the observed cTBS eVect in Gerits et al. (mean 7 ms speeding of prosaccades after FEF cTBS, but not after M1 cTBS). Although small, this eVect was highly reliable (p < .0001 within each monkey, p < .000001 when pooling over monkeys). Moreover, it was highly systematic, as it was found in 8/8 comparisons after FEF cTBS, but in 0/8 after M1 cTBS. Although 7ms is small in absolute terms, it should be recalled that prosaccading is a simple task performed very quickly, with a mean diVerence of 7 ms representing a »5% change. In Gerits et al. (2011), this change could be produced by just 40 s of FEF cTBS, yet the observed eVect was comparable in size to that found on memory-guided saccades after much more drastic and invasive interventions (e.g. muscimol injection into area LIP, see Liu et al. 2010; Fig 1b and 1c). Finally, Pouget and Valero-Cabre query the sampling rate of Gerit et al.’s eyetracker (120 Hz, one sample every 8.3 ms) relative to the highly signiWcant mean eVect of 7 ms that was found, corresponding approximately to (just below) one sample. But it is well known that with a large number of repeated samples, one can reliably measure a mean eVect at or even below the measurement unit, and in Gerits et al. (2011), we had sampled 44,465 saccades in total. Pouget and Valero-Cabre comment on our comparison of the eVective FEF TBS site with the control M1 site that Jon Driver: Deceased
Read full abstract