4.6 Article

Mapping repetition suppression of the P50 evoked response to the human cerebral cortex

Journal

CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
Volume 124, Issue 4, Pages 675-685

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2012.10.007

Keywords

Habituation; P50; Repetition suppression; Sensory gating; Cingulate; Parietal lobe

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [RO1 MH063476]
  2. Joe Young funds from the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences, Wayne State University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The cerebral network subserving repetition suppression (RS) of the P50 auditory evoked response as observed using paired-identical-stimulus (S1-S2) paradigms is not well-described. Methods: We analyzed S1-S2 data from electrodes placed on the cortices of 64 epilepsy patients. We identified regions with maximal amplitude responses to S1 (i.e., stimulus registration), regions with maximal suppression of responses to S2 relative to S1 (i.e., RS), and regions with no or minimal RS 30-80 ms post stimulation. Results: Several temporal, parietal and cingulate area regions were shown to have significant initial registration activity (i.e., strong P50 response to S1). Moreover, prefrontal, cingulate, and parietal lobe regions not previously proposed to be part of the P50 habituation neural circuitry were found to exhibit significant RS. Conclusions: The data suggest that the neural network underlying the initial phases of the RS process may include regions not previously thought to be involved like the parietal and cingulate cortexes. In addition, a significant role for the frontal lobe in mediating this function is supported. Significance: A number of regions of interest are identified through invasive recording that will allow further probing of the RS function using less invasive technology. (c) 2012 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available