Interaction of Tactile Input in the Human Primary and Secondary Somatosensory Cortex—A Magnetoencephalographic Study

Hoechstetter, Karsten; Rupp, André; Stančák, Andrej; Meinck, Hans‐Michael; Stippich, Christoph; Berg, Patrick; Scherg, Michael

doi:10.1006/nimg.2001.0855

Cited by 105 publications

(113 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the results for the interaction ratio for simultaneous stimulation in the literature are contradictory. Some studies have shown a significant interaction effect and an effect of spatial proximity (Hoechstetter et al 2001, Ishibashi et al 2000. As far as one can judge the degree of interaction was comparable with the interaction found in the current study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Several studies using event related potentials (ERP) and fields (ERF) have described an interaction effect when two tactile stimuli are applied simultaneously (Biermann et al 1998, Gandevia et al 1983, Hoechstetter et al 2001, Ishibashi et al 2000. For a linear system, the response to two simultaneously applied stimuli should be equal to the sum of the responses to each stimulus separately.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Transient and steady-state responses to mechanical stimulation of different fingers reveal interactions based on lateral inhibition

Severens

Farquhar

Desain

et al. 2010

Clinical Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transient and steady-state responses to mechanical stimulation of different fingers reveal interactions based on lateral inhibition

Severens

Farquhar

Desain

et al. 2010

Clinical Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The mean differences show that the stimulus amplitude differences were not driven by the response of an outlier subject. SI, consistent with other studies of tactile stimulation to the fingers (Forss et al, 1994b;Hoechstetter et al, 2000Hoechstetter et al, , 2001Kakigi et al, 2000;Braun et al, 2002;Druschky et al, 2003;Iguchi et al, 2005). Figure 1 shows representative examples of the location and orientation of the ECD on T1-weighted MRI images.…”

Section: Meg Experiments Features Of Si Evoked Responsessupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Previous studies have shown that somatosensory evoked fields (SEFs) can be well approximated with a small number (typically three, for median nerve stimulation) of serially and simultaneously active ECD sources (Brenner et al, 1978;Hari and Forss, 1999). For tactile stimulation, a primary current source is typically initially observed in SI with later activation having additional contributions from a second source, likely representing SII (Forss et al, 1994b;Hari and Forss, 1999;Hoechstetter et al, 2000Hoechstetter et al, , 2001Kakigi et al, 2000). To isolate the contribution from SI to the SEF, we used the following approach.…”

Section: Meg Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3B, red curve) had an initial peak with positive polarity at ϳ25 ms (labeled M25), followed by a peak with negative polarity at ϳ35 ms (M35) and another smaller but consistent positive peak at ϳ50 ms (M50). The largest peak occurred at ϳ70 ms (M70) with a negative polarity, followed by two peaks with positive polarity at ϳ100 ms (M100) and ϳ135 ms (M135) (Forss et al, 1994b;Hoechstetter et al, 2001;Druschky et al, 2003).…”

Section: Meg Experiments Features Of Si Evoked Responsesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neural Correlates of Tactile Detection: A Combined Magnetoencephalography and Biophysically Based Computational Modeling Study

Jones¹,

Pritchett²,

Stufflebeam³

et al. 2007

J. Neurosci.

150

373

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous reports conflict as to the role of primary somatosensory neocortex (SI) in tactile detection. We addressed this question in normal human subjects using whole-head magnetoencephalography (MEG) recording. We found that the evoked signal (0 -175 ms) showed a prominent equivalent current dipole that localized to the anterior bank of the postcentral gyrus, area 3b of SI. The magnitude and timing of peaks in the SI waveform were stimulus amplitude dependent and predicted perception beginning at ϳ70 ms after stimulus. To make a direct and principled connection between the SI waveform and underlying neural dynamics, we developed a biophysically realistic computational SI model that contained excitatory and inhibitory neurons in supragranular and infragranular layers. The SI evoked response was successfully reproduced from the intracellular currents in pyramidal neurons driven by a sequence of lamina-specific excitatory input, consisting of output from the granular layer (ϳ25 ms), exogenous input to the supragranular layers (ϳ70 ms), and a second wave of granular output (ϳ135 ms). The model also predicted that SI correlates of perception reflect stronger and shorter-latency supragranular and late granular drive during perceived trials. These findings strongly support the view that signatures of tactile detection are present in human SI and are mediated by local neural dynamics induced by lamina-specific synaptic drive. Furthermore, our model provides a biophysically realistic solution to the MEG signal and can predict the electrophysiological correlates of human perception.

show abstract

Neuromagnetic activation following active and passive finger movements

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The detailed time courses of cortical activities and source localizations following passive finger movement were studied using whole-head magnetoencephalography (MEG). We recorded motor-related cortical magnetic fields following voluntary movement and somatosensory-evoked magnetic fields following passive movement (PM) in 13 volunteers. The most prominent movement-evoked magnetic field (MEF1) following active movement was obtained approximately 35.3 ± 8.4 msec after movement onset, and the equivalent current dipole (ECD) was estimated to be in the primary motor cortex (Brodmann area 4). Two peaks of MEG response associated with PM were recorded from 30 to 100 msec after movement onset. The earliest component (PM1) peaked at 36.2 ± 8.2 msec, and the second component (PM2) peaked at 86.1 ± 12.1 msec after movement onset. The peak latency and ECD localization of PM1, estimated to be in area 4, were the same as those of the most prominent MEF following active movement. ECDs of PM2 were estimated to be not only in area 4 but also in the supplementary motor area (SMA) and the posterior parietal cortex (PPC) over the hemisphere contralateral to the movement, and in the secondary somatosensory cortex (S2) of both hemispheres. The peak latency of each source activity was obtained at 54–109 msec in SMA, 64–114 msec in PPC, and 84–184 msec in the S2. Our results suggest that the magnetic waveforms at middle latency (50–100 msec) after PM are different from those after active movement and that these waveforms are generated by the activities of several cortical areas, that is, area 4 and SMA, PPC, and S2. In this study, the time courses of the activities in SMA, PPC, and S2 accompanying PM in humans were successfully recorded using MEG with a multiple dipole analysis system.

show abstract

Interaction of Tactile Input in the Human Primary and Secondary Somatosensory Cortex—A Magnetoencephalographic Study

Cited by 105 publications

References 50 publications

Transient and steady-state responses to mechanical stimulation of different fingers reveal interactions based on lateral inhibition

Transient and steady-state responses to mechanical stimulation of different fingers reveal interactions based on lateral inhibition

Neural Correlates of Tactile Detection: A Combined Magnetoencephalography and Biophysically Based Computational Modeling Study

Neuromagnetic activation following active and passive finger movements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About