Literature DB >> 16903864

Limb (hand vs. foot) and response conflict have similar effects on event-related potentials (ERPs) recorded during motor imagery and overt execution.

M T Carrillo-de-la-Peña1, C Lastra-Barreira, S Galdo-Alvarez.   

Abstract

Although there is substantial evidence that motor execution (M-Ex) and motor imagery (M-Im) share a common neural substrate, the role of the primary motor cortex (M1) during imagery is still a matter of debate. The present ERP study tries to clarify the functional similarity between the two processes in respect of (i) the engagement of the corresponding somatotopic M1 areas during execution and imagery of hand vs. foot movements; and (ii) the effect of conflicting information on response preparation. To this end, we recorded ERPs from 28 electrode sites in 19 participants while they performed a conflict task with congruent (target and flanker arrowheads pointing in the same direction) and incongruent (target pointing in the opposite direction to the flanker arrowheads) trials. We obtained the lateralized readiness potential (LRP), a component generated in M1, while subjects physically executed or mentally simulated the task. As expected by the somatotopic organization of M1, the LRP was of opposite polarity when foot, rather than hand, movements were prepared. The inversion of polarity also occurred during M-Im, a result that strongly argues in favour of the participation of M1 in motor imagery. In incongruent trials, longer LRP latencies, a premature preparation of the incorrect response (positive deflection in LRP waveform) and a fronto-central N2 component associated with response conflict appeared during both M-Ex and M-Im. Altogether, the results support the functional equivalence of the two processes and give support to the clinical use of M-Im for the improvement and recovery of motor functions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16903864     DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.04926.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Neurosci        ISSN: 0953-816X            Impact factor:   3.386


  9 in total

1.  Reinforcement learning signals predict future decisions.

Authors:  Michael X Cohen; Charan Ranganath
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2007-01-10       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  On the equivalence of executed and imagined movements: evidence from lateralized motor and nonmotor potentials.

Authors:  Cornelia Kranczioch; Simon Mathews; Phil J A Dean; Annette Sterr
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  Covert motor activity on NoGo trials in a task sharing paradigm: evidence from the lateralized readiness potential.

Authors:  Antje Holländer; Christina Jung; Wolfgang Prinz
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-04-30       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Reflexive activation of newly instructed stimulus-response rules: evidence from lateralized readiness potentials in no-go trials.

Authors:  Nachshon Meiran; Maayan Pereg; Yoav Kessler; Michael W Cole; Todd S Braver
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 3.282

5.  When the brain simulates stopping: Neural activity recorded during real and imagined stop-signal tasks.

Authors:  Alberto J González-Villar; F Mauricio Bonilla; María T Carrillo-de-la-Peña
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 3.282

6.  Evaluative priming in a semantic flanker task: ERP evidence for a mutual facilitation explanation.

Authors:  Melanie Schmitz; Dirk Wentura; Thorsten A Brinkmann
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 3.526

7.  Neural correlates of unpredictable Stop and non-Stop cues in overt and imagined execution.

Authors:  Alberto González-Villar; Santiago Galdo-Álvarez; María T Carrillo-de-la-Peña
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2022-02-27       Impact factor: 4.348

8.  Complex motor task associated with non-linear BOLD responses in cerebro-cortical areas and cerebellum.

Authors:  Adnan A S Alahmadi; Rebecca S Samson; David Gasston; Matteo Pardini; Karl J Friston; Egidio D'Angelo; Ahmed T Toosy; Claudia A M Wheeler-Kingshott
Journal:  Brain Struct Funct       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 3.270

9.  Functional Equivalence of Imagined vs. Real Performance of an Inhibitory Task: An EEG/ERP Study.

Authors:  Santiago Galdo-Alvarez; Fidel M Bonilla; Alberto J González-Villar; María T Carrillo-de-la-Peña
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 3.169

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.