Electrophysiological studies in monkeys show that finger amputation triggers local remapping within the deprived primary somatosensory cortex (S1). Human neuroimaging research, however, shows persistent S1 representation of the missing hand’s fingers, even decades after amputation. Here, we explore whether this apparent contradiction stems from underestimating the distributed peripheral and central representation of fingers in the hand map. Using pharmacological single-finger nerve block and 7-tesla neuroimaging, we first replicated previous accounts (electrophysiological and other) of local S1 remapping. Local blocking also triggered activity changes to nonblocked fingers across the entire hand area. Using methods exploiting interfinger representational overlap, however, we also show that the blocked finger representation remained persistent despite input loss. Computational modeling suggests that both local stability and global reorganization are driven by distributed processing underlying the topographic map, combined with homeostatic mechanisms. Our findings reveal complex interfinger representational features that play a key role in brain (re)organization, beyond (re)mapping.

Scientists traditionally use passive stimulation to examine the organisation of primary somatosensory cortex (SI). However, given the close, bidirectional relationship between the somatosensory and motor systems, active paradigms involving free movement may uncover alternative SI representational motifs. Here, we used 7 Tesla functional magnetic resonance imaging to compare hallmark features of SI digit representation between active and passive tasks which were unmatched on task or stimulus properties. The spatial location of digit maps, somatotopic organisation, and inter‐digit representational structure were largely consistent between tasks, indicating representational consistency. We also observed some task differences. The active task produced higher univariate activity and multivariate representational information content (inter‐digit distances). The passive task showed a trend towards greater selectivity for digits versus their neighbours. Our findings highlight that, while the gross features of SI functional organisation are task invariant, it is important to also consider motor contributions to digit representation.

Individual fingers in the primary somatosensory cortex (S1) are known to be represented separately and adjacently, forming a cortical hand map. Electrophysiological studies in monkeys show that finger amputation triggers increased selectivity to the neighbouring fingers within the deprived S1, causing local reorganisation. Neuroimaging research in humans, however, shows persistent S1 finger representation of the missing hand, even decades after amputation. We aimed to resolve these apparently contrasting evidence by examining finger representation in humans following pharmacological 'amputation' using single-finger nerve block and 7T neuroimaging. We hypothesised that beneath the apparent selectivity of individual fingers in the hand map, peripheral and central processing is distributed across fingers. If each finger contributes to the cortical representation of the others, then localised input loss will weaken finger representation across the hand map. For the same reason, the non-blocked fingers will stabilise the blocked finger's representation, resulting in persistent representation of the blocked finger. Using univariate selectivity profiling, we replicated the electrophysiological findings of local S1 reorganisation. However, more comprehensive analyses confirmed that local blocking reduced representation of all fingers across the entire hand area. Importantly, multivariate analysis demonstrated that despite input loss, representation of the blocked finger remained persistent and distinct from the unblocked fingers. Computational modelling suggested that the observed findings are driven by distributed processing underlying the topographic map, combined with homeostatic mechanisms. Our findings suggest that the long-standing depiction of the somatosensory hand map is misleading. As such, accounts for map reorganisation, e.g. following amputation, need to be reconsidered.

No abstract

No abstract