Somatosensory off-response in humans: an ERP study

Quick detection of changes in the sensory environment is very important for survival, resulting in automatic shifts of attention to the event and the facilitation of subsequent processes to execute appropriate behaviors. The abrupt onset or offset of a sensory stimulus should also activate the neural network detecting changes. To test this hypothesis, we compared cortical on- and off-responses using somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEPs) elicited by a train of electrical pulses delivered to the right hand in eight healthy volunteers. SEPs were recorded from 15 electrodes on the scalp at three different interstimulus intervals (ISIs, 50, 20, and 10 ms) under two sets of conditions (attended and unattended). Both the onset and offset of stimulation evoked two similar components, P100 and N140, in the attended and unattended conditions. The latency of P100 and N140 in response to stimulus onset did not differ among the three ISIs, while the latency of both components in response to stimulus offset was significantly longer for the longer ISI; that is, detection of the cessation of the stimulation was based on short-term memory of the stimulus frequency. The present results supported a cortical network triggered by both the onset and offset of sensory stimulation. In this network, the change is automatically detected using a memory trace by comparing the abrupt event (on or off) with the preceding condition (silent or repetitive stimuli).

[1]  R. Wakai,et al.  On and Off magnetic auditory evoked responses in early infancy: A possible marker of brain immaturity , 2007, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[2]  Riitta Hari,et al.  Sustained Activation of the Human SII Cortices by Stimulus Trains , 2001, NeuroImage.

[3]  D Robertson,et al.  Differential enhancement of early and late components of the cerebral somatosensory evoked potentials during forced‐paced cognitive tasks in man , 1977, The Journal of physiology.

[4]  Jonathan Downar,et al.  Neural correlates of the prolonged salience of painful stimulation , 2003, NeuroImage.

[5]  I. Winkler,et al.  Memory-based or afferent processes in mismatch negativity (MMN): a review of the evidence. , 2005, Psychophysiology.

[6]  T. Picton,et al.  The N1 wave of the human electric and magnetic response to sound: a review and an analysis of the component structure. , 1987, Psychophysiology.

[7]  C Tomberg,et al.  Mapping early somatosensory evoked potentials in selective attention: critical evaluation of control conditions used for titrating by difference the cognitive P30, P40, P100 and N140. , 1989, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[8]  J. Downar,et al.  A cortical network sensitive to stimulus salience in a neutral behavioral context across multiple sensory modalities. , 2002, Journal of neurophysiology.

[9]  R. Kakigi,et al.  Serial and parallel processing in the human auditory cortex: a magnetoencephalographic study. , 2006, Cerebral cortex.

[10]  Hiroki Nakata,et al.  Passive enhancement of the somatosensory P100 and N140 in an active attention task using deviant alone condition , 2004, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[11]  J. Mäkelä,et al.  Neuromagnetic responses of the human auditory cortex to on- and offsets of noise bursts. , 1987, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[12]  Hiroki Nakata,et al.  Active attention modulates passive attention-related neural responses to sudden somatosensory input against a silent background , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[13]  J. Downar,et al.  A multimodal cortical network for the detection of changes in the sensory environment , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[14]  P. Goldman-Rakic,et al.  Infrequent events transiently activate human prefrontal and parietal cortex as measured by functional MRI. , 1997, Journal of neurophysiology.

[15]  H. Yabe,et al.  Somatosensory automatic responses to deviant stimuli. , 1998, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[16]  M. Yamaguchi,et al.  Auditory evoked off‐response: its source distribution is different from that of on‐response , 1998, Neuroreport.

[17]  K. Reinikainen,et al.  Rate effect and mismatch responses in the somatosensory system: ERP-recordings in humans , 1997, Biological Psychology.

[18]  Stewart Boyd,et al.  Identification and characterization of somatosensory off responses , 2006, Brain Research.

[19]  T W Picton,et al.  ON and OFF components in the auditory evoked potential , 1978, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  Koji Inui,et al.  Mismatch responses related to temporal discrimination of somatosensory stimulation , 2005, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[21]  B. Ross,et al.  The Auditory Evoked “Off” Response: Sources and Comparison with the"On" and the “Sustained” Responses , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[22]  R. Kakigi,et al.  Objective examination for two-point stimulation using a somatosensory oddball paradigm: An MEG study , 2007, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[23]  K. Reinikainen,et al.  Do event-related potentials to infrequent decrements in duration of auditory stimuli demonstrate a memory trace in man? , 1989, Neuroscience Letters.

[24]  H Hämäläinen,et al.  Is the somatosensory N250 related to deviance discrimination or conscious target detection? , 1996, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.