Literature DB >> 15195288

Nonlinearity of FMRI responses in human auditory cortex.

Thomas M Talavage1, Whitney B Edmister.   

Abstract

An investigation was made into the nature of the nonlinearity observed in auditory functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) experiments associated with increases in total duration of acoustic imaging noise [e.g., Edmister et al., 1999; Shah et al., 1999]. A two-stimulus, four-condition paradigm was used to evaluate four acoustic conditions involving: (1) the presence or absence of a desired broadband music stimulus; and (2) two possible durations of trains of acoustic noise associated with image acquisition. Responses observed while increasing the duration of acoustic imaging noise were consistent with previous work (Talavage et al. [1999]: Hum Brain Mapp7:79-88) but the response to combined stimulation did not exhibit variation as a function of the acoustic imaging noise duration. These results suggest that spectral overlap of the stimuli produced colocalized responses that did not add linearly. This conclusion has implications for conducting both blocked and rapid-presentation event-related auditory fMRI experiments. The cortical activity induced by the stimulus may not reflect the activation, in spatial extent or magnitude of signal change, occurring in the absence of other acoustic noise. Copyright 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15195288      PMCID: PMC6872043          DOI: 10.1002/hbm.20029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp        ISSN: 1065-9471            Impact factor:   5.038


  17 in total

1.  Event-related fMRI of the auditory cortex.

Authors:  P Belin; R J Zatorre; R Hoge; A C Evans; B Pike
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 6.556

2.  "Sparse" temporal sampling in auditory fMRI.

Authors:  D A Hall; M P Haggard; M A Akeroyd; A R Palmer; A Q Summerfield; M R Elliott; E M Gurney; R W Bowtell
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  Acoustic noise during functional magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  M E Ravicz; J R Melcher; N Y Kiang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Selective averaging of rapidly presented individual trials using fMRI.

Authors:  A M Dale; R L Buckner
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 5.038

5.  Functional fields in human auditory cortex revealed by time-resolved fMRI without interference of EPI noise.

Authors:  F Di Salle; E Formisano; E Seifritz; D E Linden; K Scheffler; C Saulino; G Tedeschi; F E Zanella; A Pepino; R Goebel; E Marciano
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 6.556

6.  Quantitative assessment of auditory cortex responses induced by imager acoustic noise.

Authors:  T M Talavage; W B Edmister; P J Ledden; R M Weisskoff
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 5.038

7.  Improved auditory cortex imaging using clustered volume acquisitions.

Authors:  W B Edmister; T M Talavage; P J Ledden; R M Weisskoff
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 5.038

8.  Functional MRI of brain activation induced by scanner acoustic noise.

Authors:  P A Bandettini; A Jesmanowicz; J Van Kylen; R M Birn; J S Hyde
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 4.668

9.  Is it tonotopy after all?

Authors:  Marc Schönwiesner; D Yves von Cramon; Rudolf Rübsamen
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Frequency-dependent responses exhibited by multiple regions in human auditory cortex.

Authors:  T M Talavage; P J Ledden; R R Benson; B R Rosen; J R Melcher
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  18 in total

1.  Assessment of temporal state-dependent interactions between auditory fMRI responses to desired and undesired acoustic sources.

Authors:  O Olulade; S Hu; J Gonzalez-Castillo; G G Tamer; W-M Luh; J L Ulmer; T M Talavage
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2011-03-21       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  Assessing the influence of scanner background noise on auditory processing. II. An fMRI study comparing auditory processing in the absence and presence of recorded scanner noise using a sparse design.

Authors:  Nadine Gaab; John D E Gabrieli; Gary H Glover
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  Assessing the influence of scanner background noise on auditory processing. I. An fMRI study comparing three experimental designs with varying degrees of scanner noise.

Authors:  Nadine Gaab; John D E Gabrieli; Gary H Glover
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Silent and continuous fMRI scanning differentially modulate activation in an auditory language comprehension task.

Authors:  Conny F Schmidt; Tino Zaehle; Martin Meyer; Eveline Geiser; Peter Boesiger; Lutz Jancke
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 5.038

5.  Characterizing response to elemental unit of acoustic imaging noise: an FMRI study.

Authors:  Gregory G Tamer; Wen-Ming Luh; Thomas M Talavage
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2009-03-16       Impact factor: 4.538

6.  Resting in peace or noise: scanner background noise suppresses default-mode network.

Authors:  Nadine Gaab; John D E Gabrieli; Gary H Glover
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 5.038

7.  Neural mechanisms underlying the grouping effect in short-term memory.

Authors:  Kristjan Kalm; Matthew H Davis; Dennis Norris
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2011-07-07       Impact factor: 5.038

8.  Temporal pattern of acoustic imaging noise asymmetrically modulates activation in the auditory cortex.

Authors:  Ruwan D Ranaweera; Minseok Kwon; Shuowen Hu; Gregory G Tamer; Wen-Ming Luh; Thomas M Talavage
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2015-10-28       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  The influence of rest period instructions on the default mode network.

Authors:  Christopher Benjamin; Daniel A Lieberman; Maria Chang; Noa Ofen; Sue Whitfield-Gabrieli; John D E Gabrieli; Nadine Gaab
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 3.169

10.  Modeling hemodynamic responses in auditory cortex at 1.5 T using variable duration imaging acoustic noise.

Authors:  Shuowen Hu; Olumide Olulade; Javier Gonzalez Castillo; Joseph Santos; Sungeun Kim; Gregory G Tamer; Wen-Ming Luh; Thomas M Talavage
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2009-12-04       Impact factor: 6.556

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.