Brain Structure and Function

, Volume 223, Issue 4, pp 1627–1635 | Cite as

Higher similarity in beta topography between tasks than subjects

  • Luis F. H. Basile
  • João R. Sato
  • Henrique A. Pasquini
  • Bruna Velasques
  • Pedro Ribeiro
  • Renato Anghinah
Original Article
  • 61 Downloads

Abstract

We have recently provided evidence for highly idiosyncratic topographic distributions of beta oscillations (as well as slow potentials) across individuals. More recently, by emphasizing the analysis of similarity instead of differences across tasks, we concluded that differences between an attention task and quiet resting may be negligible or at least unsystematic across subjects. Due to the possibility that individual differences could be due to noise in a wide sense or some inherent instability of beta activity, we designed a replication study to explicitly test whether pairs of individuals matched for head size and shape would still present less similar beta topography than each individual between sessions or tasks. We used independent component analysis (ICA) for an exhaustive decomposition of beta activity in a visual attention task and in quiet resting, recorded by 256-channel EEG in 20 subjects, on two separate days. We evaluated whether each ICA component obtained in one task and in one given individual could be explained by a linear regression model based on the topographic patterns of the complementary task (correlation between one component with a linear combination of components from complementary conditions), of the same task in a second session and of a matched individual. Results again showed a high topographic similarity between conditions, as previously seen between reasoning and simple visual attention beta correlates. From an overall number of 16 components representing brain activity obtained for the tasks (out of 60 originally computed where the remaining were considered noise), over 92% could satisfactorily be explained by the complementary task. Although the similarity between sessions was significantly smaller than between tasks on each day, the similarity between sessions was statistically higher than that between subjects in a highly significant way. We discuss the possible biases of group spatial averaging and the emphasis on differences as opposed to similarities, and noise in a wide sense, as the main causes of hardly replicable findings on task-related forms of activity and the inconclusive state of a universal functional mapping of cortical association areas.

Keywords

Cortical function EEG Beta rhythm Individual variability Functional mapping 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by grant 2013/07236-0 from FAPESP (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo). We once more wish to thank Mauro de Salles Aguiar for his serious recognition of our work and most special support.

References

  1. Barbas H (1992) Architecture and cortical connections of the prefrontal cortex in the rhesus monkey. Adv Neurol 57:91–115PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Barch DM, Burgess GC, Harms MP, Petersen SE, Schlaggar BL, Corbetta M, Glasser MF, Curtiss S, Dixit S, Feldt C, Nolan D, Bryant E, Hartley T, Footer O, Bjork JM, Poldrack R, Smith S, Johansen-Berg H, Snyder AZ, Van Essen DC (2013) WU-Minn HCP Consortium. Function in the human connectome: task-fMRI and individual differences in behavior. Neuroimage 80:169–189.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.05.033. (Epub 2013 May 16)CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Basile LF, Baldo MV, Castro CC, Gattaz WF (2003) The generators of slow potentials obtained during verbal, pictorial and spatial tasks Int. J Psychophysiol 48:55–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Basile LF, Brunetti EP, Pereira JF Jr, Ballester G, Amaro E Jr et al (2006) Complex slow potential generators in a simplified attention paradigm. Int J Psychophysiol 61(2):149–157CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Basile LF, Anghinah R, Ribeiro P, Ramos RT, Piedade R et al (2007) Interindividual variability in EEG correlates of attention and limits of functional mapping. Int J Psychophysiol 65(3):238–251CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Basile LF, Lozano MD, Alvarenga MY, Pereira JF, Machado S et al (2010) Minor and unsystematic cortical topographic changes of attention correlates between modalities. PLoS One 5(12):e15022CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Basile LF, Sato JR, Alvarenga MY, Henrique N Jr, Pasquini HA, Alfenas W, Machado S, Velasques B, Ribeiro P, Piedade R, Anghinah R, Ramos RT (2013) Lack of systematic topographic difference between attention and reasoning beta correlates. PLoS One 8(3):e59595CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Basile LF, Sato JR, Pasquini HA, Lozano MD, Nucci MP, Velasques B, Ribeiro P, Ramos RT, Anghinah R (2015) Individual topographic variability is inherent to cortical physiology but task-related differences may be noise. PLoS One 10(5):e0128343.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128343. (Erratum in: PLoS One)
  9. Bibbig A, Traub RD, Whittington MA (2002) Long-range synchronization of gamma and beta oscillations and the plasticity of excitatory and inhibitory synapses: a network model. J Neurophysiol 88(4):1634–1654CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bota M, Sporns O, Swanson LW3 (2015) Architecture of the cerebral cortical association connectome underlying cognition. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112(16):E2093–E2101.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1504394112. (Epub 2015 Apr 6)CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Brannen JH, Badie B, Moritz CH, Quigley M, Meyerand ME et al (2001) Reliability of functional MR imaging with word-generation tasks for mapping Broca’s area. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 22(9):1711–1718PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen MS, Kosslyn SM, Breiter HC, Di Girolamo GJ, Thompson WL et al. (1996) Changes in cortical activity during mental rotation. A mapping study using functional MRI. Brain 119(Pt 1):89–100CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis KD, Kwan CL, Crawley AP, Mikulis DJ (1998) Functional MRI study of thalamic and cortical activations evoked by cutaneous heat, cold, and tactile stimuli. J Neurophysiol 80(3):1533–1546CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Devlin JT, Poldrack RA (2007) In praise of tedious anatomy. Neuroimage 37(4):1033–1041CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Duffau H (2016) A two-level model of interindividual anatomo-functional variability of the brain and its implications for neurosurgery. Cortex.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.12.009 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Ekstrom A (2010) How and when the fMRI BOLD signal relates to underlying neural activity: the danger in dissociation. Brain Res Rev 62(2):233–244CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Fink GR, Frackowiak RS, Pietrzyk U, Passingham RE (1997) Multiple nonprimary motor areas in the human cortex. J Neurophysiol 77(4):2164–2174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Finn ES, Shen X, Scheinost D, Rosenberg MD, Huang J, Chun MM, Papademetris X, Constable RT (2015) Functional connectome fingerprinting: identifying individuals using patterns of brain connectivity. Nat Neurosci 2015 Nov 18(11):1664–1671.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4135 (Epub 2015 Oct 12)Google Scholar
  19. Glasser MF, Coalson TS, Robinson EC, Hacker CD, Harwell J, Yacoub E, Ugurbil K, Andersson J, Beckmann CF, Jenkinson M, Smith SM, Van Essen DC (2016) A multi-modal parcellation of human cerebral cortex. Nature 536(7615):171–178CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Herholz K, Thiel A, Wienhard K, Pietrzyk U, von Stockhausen HM et al. (1996) Individual functional anatomy of verb generation. Neuroimage 3(3 Pt 1):185–194Google Scholar
  21. Hinterberger T, Veit R, Strehl U, Trevorrow T, Erb M et al (2003) Brain areas activated in fMRI during self-regulation of slow cortical potentials (SCPs). Exp Brain Res 152(1):113–122CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Hudson AJ (2000) Pain perception and response: central nervous system mechanisms. Can J Neurol Sci 27(1):2–16CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kamiński J, Brzezicka A, Gola M, Wróbel A (2012) β band oscillations engagement in human alertness process. Int J Psychophysiol 85(1):125–128CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Khader P, Schicke T, Röder B, Rösler F (2008) On the relationship between slow cortical potentials and BOLD signal changes in humans. Int J Psychophysiol 67(3):252–261CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Logothetis NK1, Wandell BA (2004) Interpreting the BOLD signal. Annu Rev Physiol 66:735–769CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Macko KA, Mishkin M (1985) Metabolic mapping of higher-order visual areas in the monkey. Res Publ Assoc Res Nerv Ment Dis 63:73–86PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Noppeney U, Friston KJ, Price CJ (2004) Degenerate neuronal systems sustaining cognitive functions. J Anatomy Vol 205:6Google Scholar
  28. Onton J, Westerfield M, Townsend J, Makeig S (2006) Imaging human EEG dynamics using independent component analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 30(6):808 – 22CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Pandya DN, Yeterian EH (1990) Prefrontal cortex in relation to other cortical areas in rhesus monkey: arquitecture and connections. Progress in brain research, vol 85. Uylings HBM, Van Eden CG, De Bruin JPC, Corner MA, Feenstra MGP. (eds). Elsevier Science Publishers BV. 63–94Google Scholar
  30. Pandya DN, Seltzer B, Barbas H (1988) Input-output organization of the primate cerebral cortex. Comp Primate Biol 4:39–80Google Scholar
  31. Seghier ML, Lazeyras F, Pegna AJ, Annoni JM, Khateb A (2008) Group analysis and the subject factor in functional magnetic resonance imaging: analysis of fifty right-handed healthy subjects in a semantic language task. Hum Brain Mapp 29(4):461–477CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Tavor I, Parker Jones O, Mars RB, Smith SM, Behrens TE, Jbabdi S (2016) Task-free MRI predicts individual differences in brain activity during task performance. Science 352(6282):216–220.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad8127. (Epub 2016 Apr 7)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Traub RD, Whittington MA, Stanford IM, Jefferys JG (1996) A mechanism for generation of long-range synchronous fast oscillations in the cortex. Nature 383:621–624CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Tzourio-Mazoyer N, Josse G, Crivello F, Mazoyer B (2002) Interindividual variability in the hemispheric organization for speech. Neuroimage 16(3):765–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Whittington MA, Traub RD, Kopell N, Ermentrout B, Buhl EH (2000) Inhibition-based rhythms: experimental and mathematical observations on network dynamics. Int J Psychophysiol 38(3):315 – 36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Zilles K, Amunts K (2013) Individual variability is not noise. Trends Cogn Sci 17(4):153–155CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luis F. H. Basile
    • 1
    • 2
  • João R. Sato
    • 3
  • Henrique A. Pasquini
    • 1
  • Bruna Velasques
    • 4
  • Pedro Ribeiro
    • 4
  • Renato Anghinah
    • 5
  1. 1.Laboratory of Psychophysiology, Faculdade da SaúdeUMESPSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Division of Neurosurgery, Department of NeurologyUniversity of São Paulo Medical SchoolSão PauloBrazil
  3. 3.Center of Mathematics, Computation and CognitionUniversidade Federal do ABCSanto AndréBrazil
  4. 4.Department of PsychiatryFederal University of Rio de JaneiroRio de JaneiroBrazil
  5. 5.Department of NeurologyUniversity of São Paulo Medical SchoolSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations