Peripheral LR innervation by CN6 exhibited consistent features in the human and monkey specimens. There is a primary bifurcation of CN6 external to the LR on its global surface in the posterior orbit, or even more proximally. Branches of CN6 innervate a distinct inferior zone more posteriorly than they innervate a corresponding superior zone. The boundary between the inferior and superior zones is respected by intramuscular innervation throughout the LR and even most peripherally and anteriorly as the CN6 branches traverse the GL toward the OL. Although there was no connective tissue specialization such as a fascial plane separating the LR inferior and superior zones, the segregated intramuscular innervation pattern suggests the potential for selective compartmental activation of the LR. In a structural neuromuscular sense, the peripheral LR may be controllable as though it consisted of two separate EOM compartments. Innervation to the superior and inferior zones is segregated at least central to the primary bifurcation of the main CN6 trunk external to the LR and probably more centrally.
Structural separation of distinct superior and inferior LR zones is occasionally visible in high-resolution MRI scans of living humans. This split is often quite obvious in high-resolution MRI scans of humans with CFEOM1,
14 CFEOM3,
31 Duane syndrome,
15,16 and congenital oculomotor
18 and trochlear
18 palsies and is also observed in phenotypically normal humans who harbor the R262C or D417N mutations in the neuron-specific β-tubulin isotype III (
TUBB3),
31 which may cause CFEOM3.
32 Although it is plausible that such a structural separation of anatomic superior and inferior regions in the LR could also correspond with the distinct innervational zones, this possibility remains to be demonstrated.
Although the LR, like all other rectus EOMs, has the shape of a broad, thin strap, it has traditionally been assumed to behave homogeneously so that force acting at a single point could summarize its entire oculorotary action. The present finding of consistent segregation of intramuscular CN6 arborizations in humans and monkeys suggests that the inferior and superior zones may comprise two functional subdivisions for LR oculorotary action. These two zones may be anterior continuations of the classic dual-headed LR origin; however, it was not possible to define the LR origin in the current specimens.
Compartmental LR organization seemingly permits a degree of differential contraction of its two distinct zones. It is not clear how this segregation may relate to postulated separated actions of the OL and GL, since innervation to the OL crossed the GL in both zones, but was too fine to be traced within the OL by the present method. The APH proposes that OL and GL fibers are under at least partially differential central neural control and have distinct mechanical actions
29,33–35 despite the presence of some motor neurons innervating both the OL and GL.
36 The current suggestion of compartmental organization of the LR therefore neither challenges nor supports the APH, but adds another layer of complexity to the peripheral oculomotor apparatus.
Compartmental LR function may have important kinematic implications. Ocular torsion around the line of sight is a unique function of horizontal and vertical eye position.
37 With the head upright and stationary and for distant targets, Listing's law (LL) specifies that eye torsion in any gaze direction is that reached by a single rotation from primary eye position about an axis lying in a plane.
38 For empiric purposes, LL is satisfied if the ocular rotational velocity axis shifts by half of the shift in ocular orientation.
39
It was formerly believed that all ocular torsion was explicitly computed by the brain, which was supposed to command the cyclovertical extraocular muscles (the obliques and vertical rectus EOMs) to twist the eyes appropriately to enforce LL.
40–44 However, motor neurons activating the cyclovertical EOMs of behaving monkeys do not encode the signals corresponding to LL torsion during smooth pursuit.
45 Furthermore, electrical stimulation to the CN6 of behaving monkeys evokes saccadelike movements that conform to LL, an outcome that would be impossible if the required torsion were neurally computed.
46 The APH alternatively explains the absence of such neural signals for torsion by proposing that systematic changes in rectus EOM pulling directions generate the torsion required by LL.
34,35,47,48 According to the APH, pulleys, composed of connective tissue rings through which the rectus EOMs pass, are shifted by the OLs of the rectus EOMs themselves.
29,34,35,47,49 Although the anteroposterior locations of the pulleys are under neural control for positioning the pulleys appropriately,
49 pulley positioning is postulated not to have a simple relationship to eye torsion, because the dependence of torsion on eye position is mediated by the geometry of rectus EOM paths. The kinematic default behavior of the oculomotor apparatus therefore appears to be LL.
Nonetheless, a serious kinematic paradox has emerged. The vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) does not conform to LL. When the head rotates, velocity axes of the resulting ocular counterrotations change by one fourth of eye position, not one half, as specified by LL.
50 Ghasia and Angelaki
45 found that motor neurons driving cyclovertical EOMs not only did not command half-angle LL torsion, but also did not command the VOR's quarter-angle torsion.
45 These striking negative findings indicate that neural commands for the eye torsion necessary to override the half-angle mechanical behavior dictated by the APH are not executed by the cyclovertical EOMs. Where could this torsional behavior arise? An early suggestion that quarter-angle behavior could be implemented by differential activation of the OLs and GLs of rectus EOMs to retract their pulleys
29 has been shown to be unrealistic in many conditions
42 and was long ago abandoned.
51,52 Furthermore, mechanical pulley retraction would be inconsistent with observed zero-latency transition between quarter-angle VOR, and half-angle saccade behavior.
50
Resolving the foregoing paradox therefore requires that neurally commanded quarter-angle torsional violations of LL be executed by one or both horizontal rectus EOMs. Surgical shifting of rectus EOM insertions circumferential to the corneoscleral limbus is recognized to impart torsional actions to the transposed EOMs.
53,54 Because the human LR tendon is a thin strap 10 to 11 mm wide at the scleral insertion,
51 the effective vertical location of the LR force centroid could be shifted by more than ±2.5 mm by differential activation of the two LR zones. Simulation using a computational biomechanical model (Orbit 1.8; Eidactics, San Francisco, CA) suggests that such a shift would impart vertical action ±13% to 15% of total LR tendon force and torsional action ±16% to 22% of total LR tendon force.
55 Differential compartmental LR activation would, at no additional latency, alter the effective transverse location of a rectus EOM's functional origin without a shift in location of the pulley ring.
34 Violations of LL could be implemented by differential activation of the superior versus inferior LR zones by innervation patterns limited to activity within CN6 itself. Such compartmental activation may be demonstrated experimentally by simultaneous recording of superior and inferior zone innervation or electromyographic activity, but would not be evident from separate recording of activity in either zone.
Anatomically, compartmental innervation in CN6 appears to be sufficiently segregated external to the LR to permit selective lesion, tracer, and stimulation experiments to test putative selective functions physiologically and to determine possible specificity of central brain stem connections. Duplication of CN6 is a relatively frequent anatomic variation in humans
24–27 and may correspond to segregated projections to the LR's superior and inferior zones. It is presently unknown whether any other rectus EOMs have corresponding zonal segregation of intramuscular innervation. The feline inferior oblique EOM is innervated by distinct medial and lateral branches, which, when electrically stimulated, generate different contractile responses; however, motor neurons in the oculomotor nucleus are not topographically segregated.
56 Topographic segregation of motor neurons in the brain stem would not be necessary for functional specificity.
Despite the present anatomic evidence of compartmental LR innervation, the physiological implications remain to be confirmed. The plausibility of putative selective oculorotary actions of LR compartments could be tested by biomechanical, neuroanatomic, and neurophysiologic data. For example, selective zonal oculorotary behavior could occur only if there is incomplete interzonal mechanical force coupling among parallel EOM fibers, a likely proposition that could be tested biomechanically. Selective zonal control of the LR would require some degree of selective neural control at level of nuclear and probably prenuclear inputs to the LR, a proposition that could be tested neuroanatomically and neurophysiologically. Zonal LR innervation need not be absolutely selective to be physiologically important. For example, the existence of some overlapping neural projections to both zones, analogous to projections of a minority of feline CN6 motor neurons to both the LR and ALR, would not prevent differential control of the LR by the remaining motor neurons that project to single LR zones.
Recent findings regarding the selective subnuclear organization of each of the ocular motor nuclei for control of multiply innervated fibers suggest that much complexity in the peripheral ocular motor system remains to be elucidated.
57–59 Conventional concepts of the organization of the peripheral ocular motor system no longer suffice to explain its physiological repertoire. The possibility of compartmental LR activation deserves consideration.
Supported by U.S. Public Health Service, National Eye Institute Grants EY08313 and EY00331, and Research to Prevent Blindness. JLD is the Leonard Apt Professor of Ophthalmology.