Functional–anatomical concepts of human premotor cortex: evidence from fMRI and PET studies

Schubotz, Ricarda Ines; Cramon, D. Yves von

doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.09.014

Cited by 254 publications

(197 citation statements)

References 114 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

174

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Numerous researchers have suggested homologies between ventral premotor region (F5) identified in macaques and inferior frontal gyrus in humans, including Broca's area (Schubotz & von Cramon, 2003;Rizzolatti & Craighero, 2004;Buccino et al, 2004;Aziz-Zadeh et al, 2006). In our data, consistent activation of ventral premotor region (BA 6) and inferior frontal region (BA 46) was observed.…”

Section: Parietalsupporting

confidence: 83%

Neural correlates of human action observation in hearing and deaf subjects

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accumulating evidence has suggested the existence of a human action recognition system involving inferior frontal, parietal, and superior temporal regions that may participate in both the perception and execution of actions. However, little is known about the specificity of this system in response to different forms of human action. Here we present data from PET neuroimaging studies from passive viewing of three distinct action types, intransitive self-oriented actions (e.g., stretching, rubbing one's eyes, etc.), transitive object-oriented actions (e.g., opening a door, lifting a cup to the lips to drink), and the abstract, symbolic actions-signs used in American Sign Language. Our results show that these different classes of human actions engage a frontal/parietal/STS human action recognition system in a highly similar fashion. However, the results indicate that this neural consistency across motion classes is true primarily for hearing subjects. Data from deaf signers shows a non-uniform response to different classes of human actions. As expected, deaf signers engaged left-hemisphere perisylvian language areas during the perception of signed language signs. Surprisingly, these subjects did not engage the expected frontal/parietal/STS circuitry during passive viewing of nonlinguistic actions, but rather reliably activated middle-occipital temporal-ventral regions which are known to participate in the detection of human bodies, faces, and movements. Comparisons with data from hearing subjects establish statistically significant contributions of middle-occipital temporal-ventral during the processing of non-linguistic actions in deaf signers. These results suggest that during human motion processing, deaf individuals may engage specialized neural systems that allow for rapid, online differentiation of meaningful linguistic actions from non-linguistic human movements.

show abstract

Section: Parietalsupporting

confidence: 83%

Neural correlates of human action observation in hearing and deaf subjects

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The human anatomical equivalent of this boundary is the virtual continuation of the inferior frontal sulcus, a division that is used by researchers to demarcate the ventral limit of the frontal eye fields (FEF, area 8) (Picard and Strick, 2001) and to differentiate between PMd and PMv . However, because there are no distinct cellular subdivisions that directly correspond to any macroanatomical landmarks in humans, the precise boundary between the dorsal and ventral sections of LPMC remains uncertain (Geyer et al, 2000a;Picard and Strick, 2001;Schubotz and von Cramon, 2003). The results from our analysis suggest that the boundary between these two regions is between z = 35 (medially) and z = 45 (laterally) (Fig.…”

Section: Pmd Vs Pmvmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…The cytoarchitectonic borders between areas 44 and 6 do not reliably coincide with identifiable macroscopic features, and it has been suggested that this border cannot be determined solely on the basis of macroanatomical landmarks (Amunts et al, 1999). Additionally, recent work investigating the motor functions of Broca's area has suggested that this region may be the human equivalent of monkey area F5 Amunts et al, 1999) and that it could be considered part of PMv (Rizzolatti et al, 2002;Schubotz and von Cramon, 2003;Binkofski and Buccino, 2004). For these reasons, the rostral limit of PMv is not well established.…”

Section: Rostral Limits Of Lpmcmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…MPMC and LPMC corresponds to Brodmann's area 6, whereas SMC is divided into the primary motor cortex (M1) (Brodmann's area 4), and the primary somatosensory cortices (S1) (Brodmann's areas 1, 2, and 3). The functional distinction between motor and somatosensory areas has long been recognized, and there is agreement that the subregions of area 6 subserve distinct functions (Woolsey et al, 1952;Barbas and Pandya, 1987;Picard and Strick, 1996;Rizzolatti and Luppino, 2001;Schubotz and von Cramon, 2003). For instance, MPMC can be divided rostrally and caudally using the ventral anterior commissure (VCA) line into the pre-supplementary motor area (pre-SMA) and supplementary motor area proper (SMA proper), respectively Picard and Strick, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Three-dimensional locations and boundaries of motor and premotor cortices as defined by functional brain imaging: A meta-analysis

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mesial premotor cortex (pre-supplementary motor area and supplementary motor area proper), lateral premotor cortex (dorsal premotor cortex and ventral premotor cortex), and primary sensorimotor cortex (primary motor cortex and primary somatosensory cortex) have been identified as key cortical areas for sensorimotor function. However, the three-dimensional (3-D) anatomic boundaries between these regions remain unclear. In order to clarify the locations and boundaries for these six sensorimotor regions, we surveyed 126 articles describing pre-supplementary motor area, supplementary motor area proper, dorsal premotor cortex, ventral premotor cortex, primary motor cortex, and primary somatosensory cortex. Using strict inclusion criteria, we recorded the reported normalized stereotaxic coordinates (Talairach and Tournoux or MNI) from each experiment. We then computed the probability distributions describing the likelihood of activation, and characterized the shape, extent, and area of each sensorimotor region in 3-D. Additionally, we evaluated the nature of the overlap between the six sensorimotor regions. Using the findings from this meta-analysis, along with suggestions and guidelines of previous researchers, we developed the Human Motor Area Template (HMAT) that can be used for ROI analysis.

show abstract

“…The closely linked (Geyer, Matelli, Luppino, & Zilles, 2000) PMv, which is assumed to store action knowledge and object function, shows increased activity when new scripts have to be learnt (see Schubotz & von Cramon, 2003 for review). Activity in premotor cortex is increased when prediction (Schubotz & von Cramon, 2003), or simulation (Grèzes & Decety, 2001), and planning of movements (Badre, Poldrack, Parè-Blagoev, Insler, & Wagner, 2005;Kuhl, Dudukovic, Kahn, & Wagner, 2007;Wurm & Schubotz, 2011). This fits well with an influential model of prefrontal cortex function that suggests that prefrontal cortex is involved in activating and supporting relevant but unfavored or weak associations (Miller & Cohen, 2001).…”

Section: Adaptation In the Cortical Motor Networkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural changes when actions change: Adaptation of strong and weak expectations

Schiffer

Ahlheim

Ulrichs

et al. 2012

Human Brain Mapping

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Repeated experiences with an event create the expectation that subsequent events will expose an analog structure. These spontaneous expectations rely on an internal model of the event that results from learning. But what happens when events change? Do experience-based internal models get adapted instantaneously, or is model adaptation a function of the solidity of, i.e. familiarity with, the corresponding internal model? The present fMRI study investigated the effects of model solidity on model adaptation in an action observation paradigm. Subjects were made acquainted with a set of action movies that displayed an altered script when encountered again in the scanning session. We found model adaptation to result in an attenuation of the premotor-parietal network for action observation. Model solidity was found to modulate activation in the parahippocampal gyrus and the anterior cerebellar lobules, where increased solidity correlated with activity increase. Finally, the comparison between early and late stages of learning indicated an effect of model solidity on adaptation rate. This contrast revealed the involvement of a fronto-mesial network of Brodmann area 10 and the ACC in those states of learning that were signified by high model solidity, no matter if the memorized original or to the altered action model was the more solid component. Findings suggest that the revision of an internal model is dependent on its familiarity. Unwarranted adaptations, but also perseverations may thus be prevented.

show abstract

Functional–anatomical concepts of human premotor cortex: evidence from fMRI and PET studies

Cited by 254 publications

References 114 publications

Neural correlates of human action observation in hearing and deaf subjects

Neural correlates of human action observation in hearing and deaf subjects

Three-dimensional locations and boundaries of motor and premotor cortices as defined by functional brain imaging: A meta-analysis

Neural changes when actions change: Adaptation of strong and weak expectations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About