Literature DB >> 32795456

Intensity- and timing-dependent modulation of motion perception with transcranial magnetic stimulation of visual cortex.

Olga Lucia Gamboa Arana1, Hannah Palmer1, Moritz Dannhauer1, Connor Hile1, Sicong Liu1, Rena Hamdan1, Alexandra Brito1, Roberto Cabeza2, Simon W Davis3, Angel V Peterchev4, Marc A Sommer5, Lawrence G Appelbaum6.   

Abstract

Despite the widespread use of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in research and clinical care, the dose-response relations and neurophysiological correlates of modulatory effects remain relatively unexplored. To fill this gap, we studied modulation of visual processing as a function of TMS parameters. Our approach combined electroencephalography (EEG) with application of single pulse TMS to visual cortex as participants performed a motion perception task. During each participants' first visit, motion coherence thresholds, 64-channel visual evoked potentials (VEPs), and TMS resting motor thresholds (RMT) were measured. In second and third visits, single pulse TMS was delivered at one of two latencies, either 30 ms before the onset of motion or at the onset latency of the N2 VEP component derived from the first session. TMS was delivered at 0%, 80%, 100%, or 120% of RMT over the site of N2 peak activity, or at 120% over vertex. Behavioral results demonstrated a significant main effect of TMS timing on accuracy, with better performance when TMS was applied at the N2-Onset timing versus Pre-Onset, as well as a significant interaction, indicating that 80% intensity produced higher accuracy than other conditions at the N2-Onset. TMS effects on the P3 VEP showed reduced amplitudes in the 80% Pre-Onset condition, an increase for the 120% N2-Onset condition, and monotonic amplitude scaling with stimulation intensity. The N2 component was not affected by TMS. These findings reveal the influence of TMS intensity and timing on visual perception and electrophysiological responses, with optimal facilitation at stimulation intensities below RMT.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Motion sensitive cortex; TMS; TMS Evoked potential; Transcranial magnetic stimulation; Visual evoked potential; Visual motion

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32795456      PMCID: PMC7554219          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107581

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropsychologia        ISSN: 0028-3932            Impact factor:   3.139


  63 in total

1.  Spatial and temporal characteristics of visual motion perception involving V5 visual cortex.

Authors:  A A d'Alfonso; J van Honk; D J Schutter; A R Caffé; A Postma; E H de Haan
Journal:  Neurol Res       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 2.448

2.  Improvement in visual search with practice: mapping learning-related changes in neurocognitive stages of processing.

Authors:  Kait Clark; L Gregory Appelbaum; Berry van den Berg; Stephen R Mitroff; Marty G Woldorff
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Double dissociation of V1 and V5/MT activity in visual awareness.

Authors:  Juha Silvanto; Nilli Lavie; Vincent Walsh
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2005-02-09       Impact factor: 5.357

4.  Effects of stimulus location on automatic detection of changes in motion direction in the human brain.

Authors:  Paula Pazo-Alvarez; Elena Amenedo; Laura Lorenzo-López; Fernando Cadaveira
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2004-11-23       Impact factor: 3.046

5.  Reproducibility of TMS-Evoked EEG responses.

Authors:  Pantelis Lioumis; Dubravko Kicić; Petri Savolainen; Jyrki P Mäkelä; Seppo Kähkönen
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 5.038

6.  TMS reveals flexible use of form and motion cues in biological motion perception.

Authors:  George Mather; Luca Battaglini; Gianluca Campana
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 3.139

7.  Cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation impairs verbal working memory.

Authors:  John E Desmond; S H Annabel Chen; Perry B Shieh
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 10.422

8.  EEG responses to TMS are sensitive to changes in the perturbation parameters and repeatable over time.

Authors:  Silvia Casarotto; Leonor J Romero Lauro; Valentina Bellina; Adenauer G Casali; Mario Rosanova; Andrea Pigorini; Stefano Defendi; Maurizio Mariotti; Marcello Massimini
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-04-22       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  The chronometry of visual perception: review of occipital TMS masking studies.

Authors:  Tom A de Graaf; Mika Koivisto; Christianne Jacobs; Alexander T Sack
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2014-07-07       Impact factor: 8.989

10.  Contributions of the human temporoparietal junction and MT/V5+ to the timing of interception revealed by transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  Gianfranco Bosco; Mauro Carrozzo; Francesco Lacquaniti
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2008-11-12       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.