Nonlinear coupling between occipital and motor cortex during motor imagery: A dynamic causal modeling study

We demonstrate the capacity of dynamic causal modeling to characterize the nonlinear coupling among cortical sources that underlie time-frequency modulations in MEG data. Our experimental task involved the mental rotation of hand drawings that ten subjects used to decide if it was a right or left hand. Reaction times were shorter when the stimuli were presented with a small rotation angle (fast responses) compared to a large rotation angle (slow responses). The grand-averaged data showed that in both cases performance was accompanied by a marked increase in gamma activity in occipital areas and a concomitant decrease in alpha and beta power in occipital and motor regions. Modeling directed (cross) frequency interactions between the two regions revealed that after the stimulus induced a gamma increase and beta decrease in occipital regions, interactions with the motor area served to attenuate these modulations. The difference between fast and slow behavioral responses was manifest as an altered coupling strength in both forward and backward connections, which led to a less pronounced attenuation for more difficult (slow reaction time) trials. This was mediated by a (backwards) beta to gamma coupling from motor till occipital sources, whereas other interactions were mainly within the same frequency. Results are consistent with the theory of predictive coding and suggest that during motor imagery, the influence of motor areas on activity in occipital cortex co-determines performance. Our study illustrates the benefit of modeling experimental responses in terms of a generative model that can disentangle the contributions of intra-areal vis-à-vis inter-areal connections to time-frequency modulations during task performance.

[1]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Dynamic causal modeling of evoked responses in EEG and MEG , 2006, NeuroImage.

[2]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Canonical Microcircuits for Predictive Coding , 2012, Neuron.

[3]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Dynamic causal modelling , 2003, NeuroImage.

[4]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Dynamic Causal Models for phase coupling , 2009, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[5]  R. Knight,et al.  The functional role of cross-frequency coupling , 2010, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A Hierarchy of Time-Scales and the Brain , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[7]  Karl J. Friston The free-energy principle: a unified brain theory? , 2010, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[8]  Arjan Hillebrand,et al.  Beamformer analysis of MEG data. , 2005, International review of neurobiology.

[9]  David Mumford,et al.  On the computational architecture of the neocortex , 2004, Biological Cybernetics.

[10]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Nonlinear Coupling in the Human Motor System , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[11]  Fiona E. N. LeBeau,et al.  Cholinergic Neuromodulation Controls Directed Temporal Communication in Neocortex in Vitro , 2010, Front. Neural Circuits.

[12]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Forward and backward connections in the brain: A DCM study of functional asymmetries , 2009, NeuroImage.

[13]  Karl J. Friston The free-energy principle: a rough guide to the brain? , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[14]  I. Toni,et al.  Oscillations , 2018, Physics to a Degree.

[15]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  DCM for complex-valued data: Cross-spectra, coherence and phase-delays , 2012, NeuroImage.

[16]  R. Eckhorn,et al.  Task-related coupling from high- to low-frequency signals among visual cortical areas in human subdural recordings. , 2004, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[17]  Raymond J. Dolan,et al.  Dynamic causal models of steady-state responses , 2009, NeuroImage.

[18]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A free energy principle for the brain , 2006, Journal of Physiology-Paris.

[19]  D. Mumford On the computational architecture of the neocortex , 2004, Biological Cybernetics.

[20]  Ivan Toni,et al.  Neural Topography and Content of Movement Representations , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[21]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  EEG and MEG Data Analysis in SPM8 , 2011, Comput. Intell. Neurosci..

[22]  K. Müller,et al.  Robustly estimating the flow direction of information in complex physical systems. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[23]  R. Desimone,et al.  Laminar differences in gamma and alpha coherence in the ventral stream , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  A. Borst Seeing smells: imaging olfactory learning in bees , 1999, Nature Neuroscience.

[25]  Ben H. Jansen,et al.  Electroencephalogram and visual evoked potential generation in a mathematical model of coupled cortical columns , 1995, Biological Cybernetics.

[26]  D. Leopold,et al.  Layer-Specific Entrainment of Gamma-Band Neural Activity by the Alpha Rhythm in Monkey Visual Cortex , 2012, Current Biology.

[27]  O. Jensen,et al.  Cross-frequency coupling between neuronal oscillations , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[28]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Dynamic causal modelling of induced responses , 2008, NeuroImage.

[29]  Jürgen Kurths,et al.  Detection of n:m Phase Locking from Noisy Data: Application to Magnetoencephalography , 1998 .