L Carbonnell1, T Hasbroucq, J Grapperon, F Vidal. 1. Laboratoire de Neurobiologie de la Cognition (CNRS-LNC), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Université de Provence, 31 Chemin Joseph Aiguier, 13402, Marseille Cedex 20, France. laurence.carbonnell@up.univ-mrs.fr
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The involvement of the supplementary motor areas (SMAs) and primary motor areas (M1s) in motor processes was studied. METHODS: A between-hand choice and a simple reaction time (RT) task were mixed in a precueing paradigm. Laplacians were estimated by the source derivation method from the electroencephalogram recorded over the SMAs and M1s. RESULTS: RT was shorter in the simple than in the choice RT task. Response-locked averages showed a negative potential over M1 contralateral to the response and a positive wave over M1 ipsilateral. This ipsilateral positivity was much smaller in the simple than in the choice RT task, whereas the contralateral negativity was not different. A negativity preceding the activations of the M1s developed over the SMAs. This negativity was larger in the choice than in the simple RT task. CONCLUSIONS: In light of previous results, the present data confirm that, in between-hand choice tasks, response execution is implemented by an activation of the contralateral M1 and by an inhibition of the ipsilateral M1. SMAs and contralateral M1 appear hierarchically organized, the SMAs being more involved in response preparation and M1s in response execution. The task-dependent inhibition of ipsilateral M1 could reflect an active suppression of the erroneous response in the choice task. SIGNIFICANCE: The task context in which one movement is executed can affect the pattern of activities recorded over cortical motor structures. Cognitive context is of importance for understanding the nature of the motor command.
OBJECTIVE: The involvement of the supplementary motor areas (SMAs) and primary motor areas (M1s) in motor processes was studied. METHODS: A between-hand choice and a simple reaction time (RT) task were mixed in a precueing paradigm. Laplacians were estimated by the source derivation method from the electroencephalogram recorded over the SMAs and M1s. RESULTS: RT was shorter in the simple than in the choice RT task. Response-locked averages showed a negative potential over M1 contralateral to the response and a positive wave over M1 ipsilateral. This ipsilateral positivity was much smaller in the simple than in the choice RT task, whereas the contralateral negativity was not different. A negativity preceding the activations of the M1s developed over the SMAs. This negativity was larger in the choice than in the simple RT task. CONCLUSIONS: In light of previous results, the present data confirm that, in between-hand choice tasks, response execution is implemented by an activation of the contralateral M1 and by an inhibition of the ipsilateral M1. SMAs and contralateral M1 appear hierarchically organized, the SMAs being more involved in response preparation and M1s in response execution. The task-dependent inhibition of ipsilateral M1 could reflect an active suppression of the erroneous response in the choice task. SIGNIFICANCE: The task context in which one movement is executed can affect the pattern of activities recorded over cortical motor structures. Cognitive context is of importance for understanding the nature of the motor command.
Authors: N C van Wouwe; W P M van den Wildenberg; D O Claassen; K Kanoff; T R Bashore; S A Wylie Journal: Biol Psychol Date: 2014-07-10 Impact factor: 3.251