Ultra-high field parallel imaging of the superior parietal lobule during mental maze solving.

Center for Magnetic Resonance Research, Department of Radiology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.
Experimental Brain Research (Impact Factor: 2.22). 07/2008; 187(4):551-61. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-008-1318-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We used ultra-high field (7 T) fMRI and parallel imaging to scan the superior parietal lobule (SPL) of human subjects as they mentally traversed a maze path in one of four directions (up, down, left, right). A counterbalanced design for maze presentation and a quasi-isotropic voxel (1.46 x 1.46 x 2 mm thick) collection were implemented. Fifty-one percent of single voxels in the SPL were tuned to the direction of the maze path. Tuned voxels were distributed throughout the SPL, bilaterally. A nearest neighbor analysis revealed a "honeycomb" arrangement such that voxels tuned to a particular direction tended to occur in clusters. Three-dimensional (3D) directional clusters were identified in SPL as oriented centroids traversing the cortical depth. There were 13 same-direction clusters per hemisphere containing 22 voxels per cluster, on the average; the mean nearest-neighbor, same-direction intercluster distance was 9.4 mm. These results provide a much finer detail of the directional tuning in SPL, as compared to those obtained previously at 4 T (Gourtzelidis et al. Exp Brain Res 165:273-282, 2005). The more accurate estimates of quantitative clustering parameters in 3D brain space in this study were made possible by the higher signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise ratios afforded by the higher magnetic field of 7 T as well as the quasi-isotropic design of voxel data collection.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Prefrontal cortex (PFC) and posterior parietal cortex (PPC) are neural substrates for spatial cognition. We here review studies in which we tested the hypothesis that human frontoparietal cortex may function as a priority map. According to priority map theory, objects or locations in the visual world are represented by neural activity that is proportional to their attentional priority. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we first identified topographic maps in PFC and PPC as candidate priority maps of space. We then measured fMRI activity in candidate priority maps during the delay periods of a covert attention task, a spatial working memory task, and a motor planning task to test whether the activity depended on the particular spatial cognition. Our hypothesis was that some, but not all, candidate priority maps in PFC and PPC would be agnostic with regard to what was being prioritized, in that their activity would reflect the location in space across tasks rather than a particular kind of spatial cognition (e.g., covert attention). To test whether patterns of delay period activity were interchangeable during the spatial cognitive tasks, we used multivariate classifiers. We found that decoders trained to predict the locations on one task (e.g., working memory) cross-predicted the locations on the other tasks (e.g., covert attention and motor planning) in superior precentral sulcus (sPCS) and in a region of intraparietal sulcus (IPS2), suggesting that these patterns of maintenance activity may be interchangeable across the tasks. Such properties make sPCS in frontal cortex and IPS2 in parietal cortex viable priority map candidates, and suggest that these areas may be the human homologues of the monkey frontal eye field (FEF) and lateral intraparietal area (LIP).
    Journal of Physiology-Paris 04/2013; · 0.82 Impact Factor
  • Visual Population Codes, Edited by Nicholaus Kriegeskorte, Gabriel Kreiman, 10/2011: chapter 6: pages 163-188; The MIT Press., ISBN: 9780262016247
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Closing the structure-function divide is more challenging in the brain than in any other organ (Lichtman and Denk, 2011). For example, in early visual cortex, feedback projections to V1 can be quantified (e.g., Budd, 1998) but the understanding of feedback function is comparatively rudimentary (Muckli and Petro, 2013). Focusing on the function of feedback, we discuss how textbook descriptions mask the complexity of V1 responses, and how feedback and local activity reflects not only sensory processing but internal brain states.
    Frontiers in Psychology 01/2014; 5:1223. · 2.80 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 21, 2014