There's more than one way to scan a cat: Imaging cat auditory cortex with high-field fMRI using continuous or sparse sampling

When conducting auditory investigations using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), there are inherent potential confounds that need to be considered. Traditional continuous fMRI acquisition methods produce sounds >90 dB which compete with stimuli or produce neural activation masking evoked activity. Sparse scanning methods insert a period of reduced MRI-related noise, between image acquisitions, in which a stimulus can be presented without competition. In this study, we compared sparse and continuous scanning methods to identify the optimal approach to investigate acoustically evoked cortical, thalamic and midbrain activity in the cat. Using a 7 T magnet, we presented broadband noise, 10 kHz tones, or 0.5 kHz tones in a block design, interleaved with blocks in which no stimulus was presented. Continuous scanning resulted in larger clusters of activation and more peak voxels within the auditory cortex. However, no significant activation was observed within the thalamus. Also, there was no significant difference found, between continuous or sparse scanning, in activations of midbrain structures. Higher magnitude activations were identified in auditory cortex compared to the midbrain using both continuous and sparse scanning. These results indicate that continuous scanning is the preferred method for investigations of auditory cortex in the cat using fMRI. Also, choice of method for future investigations of midbrain activity should be driven by other experimental factors, such as stimulus intensity and task performance during scanning.

[1]  Christian Schwarzbauer,et al.  Evaluating an acoustically quiet EPI sequence for use in fMRI studies of speech and auditory processing , 2010, NeuroImage.

[2]  Peter Boesiger,et al.  Silent and continuous fMRI scanning differentially modulate activation in an auditory language comprehension task , 2008, Human brain mapping.

[3]  Gerald Langner,et al.  Laminar fine structure of frequency organization in auditory midbrain , 1997, Nature.

[4]  R I Kitney,et al.  Investigation of acoustic noise on 15 MRI scanners from 0.2 T to 3 T , 2001, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[5]  E. Olfert,et al.  Guide to the care and use of experimental animals , 1993 .

[6]  Bradley G. Goodyear,et al.  Simultaneous 3-T fMRI and high-density recording of human auditory evoked potentials , 2004, NeuroImage.

[7]  R. Reale,et al.  Tonotopic organization in auditory cortex of the cat , 1980, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[8]  Joseph S. Gati,et al.  Characterization of the blood-oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) response in cat auditory cortex using high-field fMRI , 2013, NeuroImage.

[9]  Peter A. Bandettini,et al.  The effect of stimulus duty cycle and “off” duration on BOLD response linearity , 2005, NeuroImage.

[10]  N. Harel,et al.  Blood capillary distribution correlates with hemodynamic-based functional imaging in cerebral cortex. , 2002, Cerebral cortex.

[11]  T Wüstenberg,et al.  Evidence for rapid auditory perception as the foundation of speech processing: a sparse temporal sampling fMRI study , 2004, The European journal of neuroscience.

[12]  Aysenil Belger,et al.  Hemodynamic correlates of stimulus repetition in the visual and auditory cortices: an fMRI study , 2004, NeuroImage.

[13]  Jeffery A. Winer,et al.  Microvascular organization of the cat inferior colliculus , 2011, Hearing Research.

[14]  R. Bowtell,et al.  “sparse” temporal sampling in auditory fMRI , 1999, Human brain mapping.

[15]  L Martyn Klassen,et al.  Robust automated shimming technique using arbitrary mapping acquisition parameters (RASTAMAP) , 2004, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[16]  C. Schreiner,et al.  Auditory cortical neuron response differences under isoflurane versus pentobarbital anesthesia , 2001, Hearing Research.

[17]  X. Hu,et al.  Reduction of signal fluctuation in functional MRI using navigator echoes , 1994, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[18]  Kevin C. Chan,et al.  BOLD fMRI investigation of the rat auditory pathway and tonotopic organization , 2012, NeuroImage.

[19]  P. Pascoe,et al.  Evaluation of acepromazine/meperidine/atropine premedication followed by thiopental anesthesia in the cat. , 1988, Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire.

[20]  Division on Earth Guidelines for the Care and Use of Mammals in Neuroscience and Behavioral Research , 2003 .

[21]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Statistical parametric mapping , 2013 .

[22]  Adriaan Moelker,et al.  Acoustic noise concerns in functional magnetic resonance imaging , 2003, Human brain mapping.

[23]  P. Bandettini,et al.  Functional MRI of brain activation induced by scanner acoustic noise , 1998, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[24]  J. Eggermont Temporal modulation transfer functions for AM and FM stimuli in cat auditory cortex. Effects of carrier type, modulating waveform and intensity , 1994, Hearing Research.

[25]  Li Sun,et al.  Newcastle University E-prints Citation for Published Item: Further Information on Publisher Website: Publishers Copyright Statement: Use Policy: Characterisation of the Bold Response Time Course at Different Levels of the Auditory Pathway in Non-human Primates , 2022 .

[26]  Matthew H. Davis,et al.  Hierarchical Processing in Spoken Language Comprehension , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[27]  R. Weisskoff,et al.  Quantitative assessment of auditory cortex responses induced by imager acoustic noise , 1999, Human brain mapping.

[28]  G. Mangun,et al.  Tonotopy in human auditory cortex examined with functional magnetic resonance imaging , 1997, Human brain mapping.

[29]  Teemu Rinne,et al.  Functional Maps of Human Auditory Cortex: Effects of Acoustic Features and Attention , 2009, PloS one.

[30]  Vincent J Schmithorst,et al.  Comparison of fMRI data from passive listening and active‐response story processing tasks in children , 2009, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[31]  Dave R. M. Langers,et al.  Representation of lateralization and tonotopy in primary versus secondary human auditory cortex , 2007, NeuroImage.

[32]  T. Hackett,et al.  Structural organization of the ascending auditory pathway , 2010 .

[33]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Event-Related fMRI of the Auditory Cortex , 1998, NeuroImage.

[34]  N. Kiang,et al.  Acoustic noise during functional magnetic resonance imaging. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[35]  R. Weisskoff,et al.  Improved auditory cortex imaging using clustered volume acquisitions , 1999, Human brain mapping.

[36]  Elliot A Stein,et al.  Regional cerebral blood flow responses to variable frequency whisker stimulation: an autoradiographic analysis , 2000, Brain Research.

[37]  Nikos K Logothetis,et al.  Optimizing the imaging of the monkey auditory cortex: sparse vs. continuous fMRI. , 2009, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[38]  Kenneth Hugdahl,et al.  A new verbal reports fMRI dichotic listening paradigm for studies of hemispheric asymmetry , 2008, NeuroImage.

[39]  R. Reale,et al.  Patterns of cortico‐cortical connections related to tonotopic maps in cat auditory cortex , 1980, The Journal of comparative neurology.

[40]  P. van Dijk,et al.  Simultaneous sampling of event‐related BOLD responses in auditory cortex and brainstem , 2002, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[41]  Steve C R Williams,et al.  Acoustic noise and functional magnetic resonance imaging: Current strategies and future prospects , 2002, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.