Posts tagged fMRI
Articles and news from the latest research reports.
Ultra-high-field MRI reveals language centres in the brain in much more detail
In a new investigation by the University Department of Neurology, it has been possible for the first time to demonstrate that the areas of the brain that are important for understanding language can be pinpointed much more accurately using ultra-high-field MRI (7 Tesla) than with conventional clinical MRI scanners. This helps to protect these areas more effectively during brain surgery and avoid accidentally damaging it.
Before brain surgery, it is important to precisely understand the areas of the brain required for language in order to avoid injuring them during the procedure. Their position can shift considerably, especially in patients with tumours or brain injuries. The brain’s flexibility also means that language centres can shift to other regions. If the areas responsible for language control and processing are injured during a brain operation, the patient can be left unable to communicate. In order to create a “map” of the language control centres prior to the operation, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is used these days.
A multi-centre study from 2013 demonstrated the advantages of fMRI-assisted localisation of the motor centres in the brain. In a new investigation by the working group led by Roland Beisteiner (University Department of Neurology), it has been possible for the first time to demonstrate that the areas of the brain that are important for understanding language can be pinpointed even more accurately using ultra-high-field MRI (7 Tesla) than with conventional clinical MRI scanners. The focus lies on the two most important language centres in the brain known as Wernicke’s area (which controls the understanding of language) and Broca’s area (which controls the motor functions involved with speech).
The brain is scanned for activity while the patient is carrying out speech exercises. This allows the areas required for speech to be localised much more accurately than previously. “Ultra-high-field MR offers much greater sensitivity than classic MRI scanners”, explains Roland Beisteiner, “allowing even very weak signals to be recorded in areas that would otherwise have been missed.”
Brain Structure of Kidney Donors May Make Them More Altruistic
That’s the finding of a study published in today’s Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) by Georgetown researchers.
Georgetown College psychology professor Abigail Marsh worked with John VanMeter, director of Center for Functional and Molecular Imaging at Georgetown University Medical Center, to scan the brains of 19 altruistic kidney donors.
More Sensitive to Distress
“The results of brain scans and behavioral testing suggests that these donors have some structural and functional brain differences that may make them more sensitive, on average, to other people’s distress,” Marsh explains.
The Georgetown researchers used functional MRI to record the neural activity of the kidney donors and 20 control subjects who had never donated an organ as they viewed faces with fearful, angry or neutral expressions.
Underlying Neural Basis
In the right amygdala, an emotion-sensitive brain region, altruists displayed greater neural activity while viewing fearful expressions than did control subjects.
When asked to identify the emotional expressions presented in the face images, altruists recognized fearful facial expressions relatively more accurately than the control subjects.
“The brain scans revealed that the right amygdala volume of altruists is larger than that of non-altruists,” Marsh says. “The findings suggest that individual differences in altruism may have an underlying neural basis.”
Opposite From Psychopaths?
These findings dovetail with previous research by the professor showing structural and functional brain differences that appear to make people with psychopathic traits less sensitive to others’ fear and distress.
These differences include amygdalas that are smaller and less responsive to fearful expressions. People who are unusually altruistic may therefore be the opposite in some ways from people who are psychopathic.
To find kidney donors, the researchers reached out to the Washington Regional Transplant Community (WRTC), a federally designated organ procurement organizations.
A Donor’s Story
Harold Mintz, former northern Virginian who volunteered with WRTC and agreed to participate in the Georgetown study, donated a kidney to an anonymous stranger he later learned was an Ethiopian refugee who had settled in Washington, D.C.
Mintz, who now lives in California and speaks to high school students about his 2000 donation, says a series of events over time led him to supply the kidney, including his father dying of cancer diagnosed too late at the age of 56.
One Valentine’s Day in 1988, Mintz and his wife were shopping separately for presents and Mintz noticed parents in a mall with a sign saying “Please Save Our Daughter’s Life.” He walked past them, then turned around and asked what they needed. It turned out the daughter had leukemia and needed a bone marrow transplant.
The couple decided to forget about the holiday and donated blood to see if either of them were a match. But no match was found and Mintz later noticed the daughter’s obituary in the newspaper.
Stories Taken to Heart
Mintz also was surprised to hear that although the couple’s daughter had just died, they thanked everyone who tried to help and expressed hope that they might help someone else.
“All these stories just kind of stuck inside my head and every time I’d see a story about a medical story of distress, it would just kind of get put away in a file inside my heart,” Mintz says.
Marsh notes that kidney disease is now the eighth-leading cause of death in the U.S., and that living kidney donations are the best hope for restoring people to health who have kidney disease.
“Dr. Marsh’s work is a great example of how fMRI can be used to provide insight into how differences in the brain’s response can lead individuals to perform such magnanimous acts,” VanMeter says.
(Image caption: These figures show lagged maturation of connections in ADHD between the default mode network, involved in internally-directed thought (i.e., daydreaming) and shown on the left of each figure, and two brain networks involved in externally-focused attention, shown on the right of each figure. The width of each arc represents the number of lagged connections between two regions within each network. Connections that normally increase with age and that are hypoconnected in ADHD are shown in blue; connections that normally decrease with age and that are hyperconnected in ADHD are shown in red.)
Slow to mature, quick to distract: ADHD brain study finds slower development of key connections
A peek inside the brains of more than 750 children and teens reveals a key difference in brain architecture between those with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and those without.
Kids and teens with ADHD, a new study finds, lag behind others of the same age in how quickly their brains form connections within, and between, key brain networks.
The result: less-mature connections between a brain network that controls internally-directed thought (such as daydreaming) and networks that allow a person to focus on externally-directed tasks. That lag in connection development may help explain why people with ADHD get easily distracted or struggle to stay focused.
What’s more, the new findings, and the methods used to make them, may one day allow doctors to use brain scans to diagnose ADHD — and track how well someone responds to treatment. This kind of neuroimaging “biomarker” doesn’t yet exist for ADHD, or any psychiatric condition for that matter.
The new findings come from a team in the University of Michigan Medical School’s Department of Psychiatry. They used highly advanced computing techniques to analyze a large pool of detailed brain scans that were publicly shared for scientists to study. Their results are published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Lead author Chandra Sripada, M.D., Ph.D., and colleagues looked at the brain scans of 275 kids and teens with ADHD, and 481 others without it, using “connectomic” methods that can map interconnectivity between networks in the brain.
The scans, made using function magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scanners, show brain activity during a resting state. This allows researchers to see how a number of different brain networks, each specialized for certain types of functions, were “talking” within and amongst themselves.
The researchers found lags in development of connection within the internally-focused network, called the default mode network or DMN, and in development of connections between DMN and two networks that process externally-focused tasks, often called task-positive networks, or TPNs. They could even see that the lags in connection development with the two task-related networks — the frontoparietal and ventral attention networks — were located primarily in two specific areas of the brain.
The new findings mesh well with what other researchers have found by examining the physical structure of the brains of people with and without ADHD in other ways.
Such research has already shown alterations in regions within DMN and TPNs. So, the new findings build on that understanding and add to it.
The findings are also relevant to thinking about the longitudinal course of ADHD from childhood to adulthood. For instance, some children and teens “grow out” of the disorder, while for others the disorder persists throughout adulthood. Future studies of brain network maturation in ADHD could shed light into the neural basis for this difference.
“We and others are interested in understanding the neural mechanisms of ADHD in hopes that we can contribute to better diagnosis and treatment,” says Sripada, an assistant professor and psychiatrist who holds a joint appointment in the U-M Philosophy department and is a member of the U-M Center for Computational Medicine and Bioinformatics. “But without the database of fMRI images, and the spirit of collaboration that allowed them to be compiled and shared, we would never have reached this point.”
Sripada explains that in the last decade, functional medical imaging has revealed that the human brain is functionally organized into large-scale connectivity networks. These networks, and the connections between them, mature throughout early childhood all the way to young adulthood. “It is particularly noteworthy that the networks we found to have lagging maturation in ADHD are linked to the very behaviors that are the symptoms of ADHD,” he says.
Studying the vast array of connections in the brain, a field called connectomics, requires scientists to be able to parse through not just the one-to-one communications between two specific brain regions, but the patterns of communication among thousands of nodes within the brain. This requires major computing power and access to massive amounts of data – which makes the open sharing of fMRI images so important.
“The results of this study set the stage for the next phase of this research, which is to examine individual components of the networks that have the maturational lag,” he says. “This study provides a coarse-grained understanding, and now we want to examine this phenomenon in a more fine-grained way that might lead us to a true biological marker, or neuromarker, for ADHD.”
Sripada also notes that connectomics could be used to examine other disorders with roots in brain connectivity – including autism, which some evidence has suggested stems from over-maturation of some brain networks, and schizophrenia, which may arise from abnormal connections. Pooling more fMRI data from people with these conditions, and depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder and more could boost connectomics studies in those fields.
Neuroscientists decode brain maps to discover how we take aim
Serena Williams won her third consecutive US Open title a few days ago, thanks to reasons including obvious ones like physical strength and endurance. But how much did her brain and its egocentric and allocentric functions help the American tennis star retain the cup?
Quite significantly, according to York University neuroscience researchers whose recent study shows that different regions of the brain help to visually locate objects relative to one’s own body (self-centred or egocentric) and those relative to external visual landmarks (world-centred or allocentric).
“The current study shows how the brain encodes allocentric and egocentric space in different ways during activities that involve manual aiming,” explains Distinguished Research Professor Doug Crawford, in the Department of Psychology. “Take tennis for example. Allocentric brain areas could help aim the ball toward the opponent’s weak side of play, whereas the egocentric areas would make sure your muscles return the serve in the right direction.”
The study finding will help healthcare providers to develop therapeutic treatment for patients with brain damage in these two areas, according to the neuroscientists at York Centre for Vision Research.
“As a neurologist, I am excited by the finding because it provides clues for doctors and therapists how they might design different therapeutic approaches,” says Ying Chen, lead researcher and PhD candidate in the School of Kinesiology and Health Science.
The study, Allocentric versus Egocentric Representation of Remembered Reach Targets in Human Cortex, published in the Journal of Neuroscience, was conducted using the state-of-the-art fMRI scanner at York U’s Sherman Health Science Research Centre. A dozen participants were tested using the scanner, which Chen modified to distinguish brain areas relating to these two functions.
The participants were given three different tasks to complete when viewing remembered visual targets: egocentric reach (remembering absolute target location), allocentric reach (remembering target location relative to a visual landmark) and a nonspatial control, colour report (reporting color of target).
When participants remembered egocentric targets’ locations, areas in the upper occipital lobe (at the back of the brain) encoded visual direction. In contrast, lower areas of the occipital and temporal lobes encoded object direction relative to other visual landmarks. In both cases, the parietal and frontal cortex (near the top of the brain) coded reach direction during the movement.
(Image caption: A series of three MRI images (top row) shows how dopamine concentrations change over time in the brain’s ventral striatum. Photocollage: Christine Daniloff/MIT, with images courtesy of the researchers)
MRI sensor allows neuroscientists to map neural activity with molecular precision
Launched in 2013, the national BRAIN Initiative aims to revolutionize our understanding of cognition by mapping the activity of every neuron in the human brain, revealing how brain circuits interact to create memories, learn new skills, and interpret the world around us.
Before that can happen, neuroscientists need new tools that will let them probe the brain more deeply and in greater detail, says Alan Jasanoff, an MIT associate professor of biological engineering. “There’s a general recognition that in order to understand the brain’s processes in comprehensive detail, we need ways to monitor neural function deep in the brain with spatial, temporal, and functional precision,” he says.
Jasanoff and colleagues have now taken a step toward that goal: They have established a technique that allows them to track neural communication in the brain over time, using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) along with a specialized molecular sensor. This is the first time anyone has been able to map neural signals with high precision over large brain regions in living animals, offering a new window on brain function, says Jasanoff, who is also an associate member of MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research.
His team used this molecular imaging approach, described in the May 1 online edition of Science, to study the neurotransmitter dopamine in a region called the ventral striatum, which is involved in motivation, reward, and reinforcement of behavior. In future studies, Jasanoff plans to combine dopamine imaging with functional MRI techniques that measure overall brain activity to gain a better understanding of how dopamine levels influence neural circuitry.
“We want to be able to relate dopamine signaling to other neural processes that are going on,” Jasanoff says. “We can look at different types of stimuli and try to understand what dopamine is doing in different brain regions and relate it to other measures of brain function.”
Tracking dopamine
Dopamine is one of many neurotransmitters that help neurons to communicate with each other over short distances. Much of the brain’s dopamine is produced by a structure called the ventral tegmental area (VTA). This dopamine travels through the mesolimbic pathway to the ventral striatum, where it combines with sensory information from other parts of the brain to reinforce behavior and help the brain learn new tasks and motor functions. This circuit also plays a major role in addiction.
To track dopamine’s role in neural communication, the researchers used an MRI sensor they had previously designed, consisting of an iron-containing protein that acts as a weak magnet. When the sensor binds to dopamine, its magnetic interactions with the surrounding tissue weaken, which dims the tissue’s MRI signal. This allows the researchers to see where in the brain dopamine is being released. The researchers also developed an algorithm that lets them calculate the precise amount of dopamine present in each fraction of a cubic millimeter of the ventral striatum.
After delivering the MRI sensor to the ventral striatum of rats, Jasanoff’s team electrically stimulated the mesolimbic pathway and was able to detect exactly where in the ventral striatum dopamine was released. An area known as the nucleus accumbens core, known to be one of the main targets of dopamine from the VTA, showed the highest levels. The researchers also saw that some dopamine is released in neighboring regions such as the ventral pallidum, which regulates motivation and emotions, and parts of the thalamus, which relays sensory and motor signals in the brain.
Each dopamine stimulation lasted for 16 seconds and the researchers took an MRI image every eight seconds, allowing them to track how dopamine levels changed as the neurotransmitter was released from cells and then disappeared. “We could divide up the map into different regions of interest and determine dynamics separately for each of those regions,” Jasanoff says.
He and his colleagues plan to build on this work by expanding their studies to other parts of the brain, including the areas most affected by Parkinson’s disease, which is caused by the death of dopamine-generating cells. Jasanoff’s lab is also working on sensors to track other neurotransmitters, allowing them to study interactions between neurotransmitters during different tasks.
Meditation helps pinpoint neurological differences between two types of love
These findings won’t appear on any Hallmark card, but romantic love tends to activate the same reward areas of the brain as cocaine, research has shown.
Now Yale School of Medicine researchers studying meditators have found that a more selfless variety of love — a deep and genuine wish for the happiness of others without expectation of reward — actually turns off the same reward areas that light up when lovers see each other.
“When we truly, selflessly wish for the well-being of others, we’re not getting that same rush of excitement that comes with, say, a tweet from our romantic love interest, because it’s not about us at all,” said Judson Brewer, adjunct professor of psychiatry at Yale now at the University of Massachusetts.
Brewer and Kathleen Garrison, postdoctoral researcher in Yale’s Department of Psychiatry, report their findings in a paper scheduled to be published online Feb. 12 in the journal Brain and Behavior.
The neurological boundaries between these two types of love become clear in fMRI scans of experienced meditators. The reward centers of the brain that are strongly activated by a lover’s face (or a picture of cocaine) are almost completely turned off when a meditator is instructed to silently repeat sayings such as “May all beings be happy.”
Such mindfulness meditations are a staple of Buddhism and are now commonly practiced in Western stress reduction programs, Brewer notes. The tranquility of this selfless love for others — exemplified in such religious figures such as Mother Theresa or the Dalai Llama — is diametrically opposed to the anxiety caused by a lovers’ quarrel or extended separation. And it carries its own rewards.
“The intent of this practice is to specifically foster selfless love — just putting it out there and not looking for or wanting anything in return,” Brewer said. “If you’re wondering where the reward is in being selfless, just reflect on how it feels when you see people out there helping others, or even when you hold the door for somebody the next time you are at Starbucks.”
Study finds context is key in helping us to recognise a face
Why does it take longer to recognise a familiar face when seen in an unfamiliar setting, like seeing a work colleague when on holiday? A new study published today in Nature Communications has found that part of the reason comes down to the processes that our brain performs when learning and recognising faces.
During the experiment, participants were shown faces of people that they had never seen before, while lying inside an MRI scanner in the Department of Psychology at Royal Holloway. They were shown some of these faces numerous times from different angles and were asked to indicate whether they had seen that person before or not.
While participants were relatively good at recognising faces once they had seen them a few times, using a new mathematical approach, the scientists found that people’s decisions of whether they recognised someone were also dependent on the context in which they encountered the face. If participants had recently seen lots of unfamiliar faces, they were more likely to say that the face they were looking at was unfamiliar, even if they had seen the face several times before and had previously reported that they did recognise the face.
Activity in two areas of the brain matched the way in which the mathematical model predicted people’s performance.
“Our study has characterised some of the mathematical processes that are happening in our brain as we do this,” said lead author Dr Matthew Apps. “One brain area, called the fusiform face area, seems to be involved in learning new information about faces and increasing their familiarity.
“Another area, called the superior temporal sulcus, we found to have an important role in influencing our report of whether we recognise someone’s face, regardless of whether we are actually familiar with them or not. While this seems rather counter-intuitive, it may be an important mechanism for simplifying all the information that we need to process about faces.”
“Face recognition is a fundamental social skill, but we show how error prone this process can be. To recognise someone, we become familiar with their face, by learning a little more about what it looks like,” said co-author Professor Manos Tsakiris.
“At the same time, we often see people in different contexts. The recognition biases that we measured might give us an advantage in integrating information about identity and social context, two key elements of our social world.”
(Source: rhul.ac.uk)
Looking for a needle in a haystack: new research shows how brain prepares to start searching
Many of us have steeled ourselves for those ‘needle in a haystack’ tasks of finding our vehicle in an airport car park, or scouring the supermarket shelves for a favourite brand.
A new scientific study has revealed that our understanding of how the human brain prepares to perform visual search tasks of varying difficulty may now need to be revised.
When people search for a specific object, they tend to hold in mind a visual representation of it, based on key attributes like shape, size or colour. Scientists call this ‘advanced specification’. For example, we might search for a friend at a busy railway station by scanning the platform for someone who is very tall or who is wearing a green coat, or a combination of these characteristics.
Researchers from the School of Psychology at the University of Lincoln, UK, set out to better explain how these abstract visual representations are formed. They used fMRI scanners to record neural activity when volunteers prepared to search for a target object: a coloured letter amid a screen of other coloured letters.
Their findings, published in the journal ‘Brain Research’, are the first to fully isolate the different areas of the human brain involved in this ‘prepare to search’ function. Surprisingly, they show that the advanced frontal areas of the brain, usually key to advanced cognitive tasks, appear to take a backseat. Instead it is the basic back areas of the brain and the sub-cortical areas that do the work.
Dr Patrick Bourke from the University of Lincoln’s School of Psychology, who led the study, said: “Up until now, when researchers have studied visual search tasks they have also found that frontal areas of the brain were active. This has been assumed to indicate a control system: an ‘executive’ that largely resides in the advanced front of the brain which sends signals to the simpler back of the brain, activating visual memories. Here, when we isolated the ‘prepare’ part of the task from the actual search and response phase we found that this activation in the front was no longer present.”
This finding has important implications for understanding the fundamental brain processes involved. It was previously thought that the Intra-parietal region of the brain, which is linked to visual attention, was the central component of the supposed ‘front-back’ control network, relaying useful information (such as a shape or colour bias) from frontal areas of the brain to the back, where simple visual representations of the object are held. If the frontal areas are not activated in the preparation phase, this cannot be the case.
The study also showed that the pattern of brain activation varied depending on the anticipated difficulty of the search task, even when the target object was the same. This indicates that rather than holding in mind a single representation of an object, a new target is constructed each time, depending on the nature of the task.
Dr Bourke added: “While consistent with previous brain imaging work on visual search, these results change the interpretations and assumptions that have been applied previously. Notably, they highlight a difference between studies of animals’ brains and those of humans. Studies with monkeys convincingly show the front-back control system and we thought we understood how this worked. At the same time our findings are consistent with a growing body of brain imaging work in humans that also shows no frontal brain activation when short term memories are held.”
(Source: lincoln.ac.uk)
Space around others perceived just as our own
A study from Karolinska Institutet in Sweden has shown that neurons in our brain ‘mirror’ the space near others, just as if this was the space near ourselves. The study, published in the scientific journal Current Biology, sheds new light on a question that has long preoccupied psychologists and neuroscientists regarding the way in which the brain represents other people and the events that happens to those people.
"We usually experience others as clearly separated from us, occupying a very different portion of space," says Claudio Brozzoli, lead author of the study at the Department of Neuroscience. "However, what this study shows is that we perceive the space around other people in the same way as we perceive the space around our own body."
The new research revealed that visual events occurring near a person’s own hand and those occurring near another’s hand are represented by the same region of the frontal lobe (premotor cortex). In other words, the brain can estimate what happens near another person’s hand because the neurons that are activated are the same as those that are active when something happens close to our own hand. It is possible that this shared representation of space could help individuals to interact more efficiently — when shaking hands, for instance. It might also help us to understand intuitively when other people are at risk of getting hurt, for example when we see a friend about to be hit by a ball.
The study consists of a series of experiments in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in which a total of forty-six healthy volunteers participated. In the first experiment, participants observed a small ball attached to a stick moving first near their own hand, and then near another person’s hand. The authors discovered a region in the premotor cortex that contained groups of neurons that responded to the object only if it was close to the individual’s own hand or close to the other person’s hand. In a second experiment, the authors reproduced their finding before going on to show that this result was not dependent on the order of stimulus presentation near the two hands.
"We know from earlier studies that our brains represent the actions of other people using the same groups of neurons that represent our own actions; the so called mirror neuron system", says Henrik Ehrsson, co-author of the study. "But here we found a new class of these kinds of neuronal populations that represent space near others just as they represent space near ourselves."
According to the scientists, this study provides a new perspective that could help facilitate the understanding of behavioural and emotional interactions between people, since — from the brain’s perspective — the space between us is shared.
Remembering to Remember Supported by Two Distinct Brain Processes
You plan on shopping for groceries later and you tell yourself that you have to remember to take the grocery bags with you when you leave the house. Lo and behold, you reach the check-out counter and you realize you’ve forgotten the bags.
Remembering to remember — whether it’s grocery bags, appointments, or taking medications — is essential to our everyday lives. New research sheds light on two distinct brain processes that underlie this type of memory, known as prospective memory.
The research is published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.
To investigate how prospective memory is processed in the brain, psychological scientist Mark McDaniel of Washington University in St. Louis and colleagues had participants lie in an fMRI scanner and asked them to press one of two buttons to indicate whether a word that popped up on a screen was a member of a designated category. In addition to this ongoing activity, participants were asked to try to remember to press a third button whenever a special target popped up. The task was designed to tap into participants’ prospective memory, or their ability to remember to take certain actions in response to specific future events.
When McDaniel and colleagues analyzed the fMRI data, they observed that two distinct brain activation patterns emerged when participants made the correct button press for a special target.
When the special target was not relevant to the ongoing activity — such as a syllable like “tor” — participants seemed to rely on top-down brain processes supported by the prefrontal cortex. In order to answer correctly when the special syllable flashed up on the screen, the participants had to sustain their attention and monitor for the special syllable throughout the entire task. In the grocery bag scenario, this would be like remembering to bring the grocery bags by constantly reminding yourself that you can’t forget them.
When the special target was integral to the ongoing activity—such as a whole word, like “table” — participants recruited a different set of brain regions, and they didn’t show sustained activation in these regions. The findings suggest that remembering what to do when the special target was a whole word didn’t require the same type of top-down monitoring. Instead, the target word seemed to act as an environmental cue that prompted participants to make the appropriate response – like reminding yourself to bring the grocery bags by leaving them near the front door.
“These findings suggest that people could make use of several different strategies to accomplish prospective memory tasks,” says McDaniel.
McDaniel and colleagues are continuing their research on prospective memory, examining how this phenomenon might change with age.
(Image: Shutterstock)