Literature DB >> 3954684

Comparison between simultaneously recorded auditory-evoked magnetic fields and potentials elicited by ipsilateral, contralateral and binaural tone burst stimulation.

C Pantev, B Lütkenhöner, M Hoke, K Lehnertz.   

Abstract

Both auditory-evoked magnetic fields (AEMF) and auditory-evoked potentials (AEP) mainly consist of three peaks with latencies of about 50, 100 and 160 ms. Comparison of responses to ipsilateral, contralateral and binaural stimulation yields no significant amplitude or latency differences of the AEP peaks whereas the simultaneously recorded AEMF peaks exhibit a 10 ms shorter latency and an approximately 38% greater amplitude for contralateral versus ipsilateral stimulation. This fact can be due to differences in the strength, location (especially the depth) and the direction of the dipole source, and a decision cannot be made considering the data recorded from just one position. Another finding is that binaural stimulation reduces the peak amplitudes by approximately 25% compared with contralateral stimulation. This result indicates some kind of interference between the ipsilateral and contralateral pathways ('binaural interaction').

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3954684     DOI: 10.3109/00206098609078369

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Audiology        ISSN: 0020-6091


  37 in total

1.  Tonotopic cortical representation of periodic complex sounds.

Authors:  Selene Cansino; Antoine Ducorps; Richard Ragot
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Neural coding of continuous speech in auditory cortex during monaural and dichotic listening.

Authors:  Nai Ding; Jonathan Z Simon
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-10-05       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Discrimination of speech stimuli based on neuronal response phase patterns depends on acoustics but not comprehension.

Authors:  Mary F Howard; David Poeppel
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-05-19       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Intersession replicability of dipole parameters from three components of the auditory evoked magnetic field.

Authors:  S B Baumann; R L Rogers; A C Papanicolaou; C L Saydjari
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 3.020

5.  Lateralized auditory spatial perception and the contralaterality of cortical processing as studied with functional magnetic resonance imaging and magnetoencephalography.

Authors:  M G Woldorff; C Tempelmann; J Fell; C Tegeler; B Gaschler-Markefski; H Hinrichs; H J Heinz; H Scheich
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 5.038

6.  Auditory evoked fields to illusory sound source movements.

Authors:  J P Mäkelä; L McEvoy
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Cortical activation by monaural speech sound stimulation demonstrated by positron emission tomography.

Authors:  S Hirano; Y Naito; H Okazawa; H Kojima; I Honjo; K Ishizu; Y Yenokura; Y Nagahama; H Fukuyama; J Konishi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Lateralization and Binaural Interaction of Middle-Latency and Late-Brainstem Components of the Auditory Evoked Response.

Authors:  Andrew R Dykstra; Daniel Burchard; Christian Starzynski; Helmut Riedel; Andre Rupp; Alexander Gutschalk
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2016-05-19

9.  Stimulus dependence of contralateral dominance in human auditory cortex.

Authors:  Alexander Gutschalk; Iris Steinmann
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2014-10-24       Impact factor: 5.038

10.  Spinal and Cerebral Integration of Noxious Inputs in Left-handed Individuals.

Authors:  Stéphane Northon; Zoha Deldar; Mathieu Piché
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  2021-08-02       Impact factor: 3.020

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.