Limits...
Identifying environmental sounds: a multimodal mapping study.

Tomasino B, Canderan C, Marin D, Maieron M, Gremese M, D'Agostini S, Fabbro F, Skrap M - Front Hum Neurosci (2015)

Bottom Line: These results indicate that deficits of ES recognition do not exclusively reflect lesions to the right or to the left hemisphere but both hemispheres are involved.We applied a multimodal mapping approach and found that, although the meta-analysis showed that part of the left and right STG/MTG activation during ES processing might in part be related to design choices, this area was one of the most frequently lesioned areas in our patients, thus highlighting its causal role in ES processing.We found that the ROIs we drew on the two clusters of activation found in the left and in the right STG overlapped with the lesions of at least 4 out of the 7 patients' lesions, indicating that the lack of STG activation found for patients is related to brain damage and is crucial for explaining the ES deficit.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico "E. Medea", Polo Regionale del Friuli Venezia Giulia Udine, Italy.

ABSTRACT
Our environment is full of auditory events such as warnings or hazards, and their correct recognition is essential. We explored environmental sounds (ES) recognition in a series of studies. In study 1 we performed an Activation Likelihood Estimation (ALE) meta-analysis of neuroimaging experiments addressing ES processing to delineate the network of areas consistently involved in ES processing. Areas consistently activated in the ALE meta-analysis were the STG/MTG, insula/rolandic operculum, parahippocampal gyrus and inferior frontal gyrus bilaterally. Some of these areas truly reflect ES processing, whereas others are related to design choices, e.g., type of task, type of control condition, type of stimulus. In study 2 we report on 7 neurosurgical patients with lesions involving the areas which were found to be activated by the ALE meta-analysis. We tested their ES recognition abilities and found an impairment of ES recognition. These results indicate that deficits of ES recognition do not exclusively reflect lesions to the right or to the left hemisphere but both hemispheres are involved. The most frequently lesioned area is the hippocampus/insula/STG. We made sure that any impairment in ES recognition would not be related to language problems, but reflect impaired ES processing. In study 3 we carried out an fMRI study on patients (vs. healthy controls) to investigate how the areas involved in ES might be functionally deregulated because of a lesion. The fMRI evidenced that controls activated the right IFG, the STG bilaterally and the left insula. We applied a multimodal mapping approach and found that, although the meta-analysis showed that part of the left and right STG/MTG activation during ES processing might in part be related to design choices, this area was one of the most frequently lesioned areas in our patients, thus highlighting its causal role in ES processing. We found that the ROIs we drew on the two clusters of activation found in the left and in the right STG overlapped with the lesions of at least 4 out of the 7 patients' lesions, indicating that the lack of STG activation found for patients is related to brain damage and is crucial for explaining the ES deficit.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

(A) Overlap of the patients' lesions in standard space. MRIcron software (http://www.mccauslandcenter.sc.edu/mricro/mricron/index.html) was used to draw the patients' lesions on their T1 and T2 MRI scans, creating the ROIs which were normalized to the MNI space using the “Clinical Tool box” (http://www.mccauslandcenter.sc.edu/CRNL/clinical-toolbox) for SPM8 (http://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm/software/spm8/). The results highlighted the areas of the brain that are related to the deficit (Karnath et al., 2004). The number of overlapping lesions is illustrated by different colors that code for increasing frequencies (as indicated in the bar code). (B) Patients' pathological performance (mean accuracy) and healthy controls' accuracy and patients' qualitative analysis of errors. (C) The most frequently lesioned area (in bright green-yellow) is the hippocampus/insula/superior temporal gyrus, as shown by the Anatomy toolbox. By using Marsbar (http://marsbar.sourceforge.net/), we drew two ROIs on the two clusters found in the left and in the right STG (which were less activated in patients than controls), shown respectively in pink and in red. The density bar shows that at least 4 out of 7 patients' lesions overlapped with the ROIs drawn on the STG. (D) Network of areas commonly activated in patients and controls and areas differentially recruited by controls vs. patients during ES recognition in addition to the network for ES processing in patients and controls. Activations were superimposed on a brain template provided by spm5.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4612670&req=5

Figure 2: (A) Overlap of the patients' lesions in standard space. MRIcron software (http://www.mccauslandcenter.sc.edu/mricro/mricron/index.html) was used to draw the patients' lesions on their T1 and T2 MRI scans, creating the ROIs which were normalized to the MNI space using the “Clinical Tool box” (http://www.mccauslandcenter.sc.edu/CRNL/clinical-toolbox) for SPM8 (http://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm/software/spm8/). The results highlighted the areas of the brain that are related to the deficit (Karnath et al., 2004). The number of overlapping lesions is illustrated by different colors that code for increasing frequencies (as indicated in the bar code). (B) Patients' pathological performance (mean accuracy) and healthy controls' accuracy and patients' qualitative analysis of errors. (C) The most frequently lesioned area (in bright green-yellow) is the hippocampus/insula/superior temporal gyrus, as shown by the Anatomy toolbox. By using Marsbar (http://marsbar.sourceforge.net/), we drew two ROIs on the two clusters found in the left and in the right STG (which were less activated in patients than controls), shown respectively in pink and in red. The density bar shows that at least 4 out of 7 patients' lesions overlapped with the ROIs drawn on the STG. (D) Network of areas commonly activated in patients and controls and areas differentially recruited by controls vs. patients during ES recognition in addition to the network for ES processing in patients and controls. Activations were superimposed on a brain template provided by spm5.

Mentions: Table 4 and Figure 2 show the patients' performances on the ES confrontation naming task. Patients scored below the normal range (as measured by Z-scores). Most of the patients' responses were not related to target sounds (35.94 ± 17.21%, see Figure 2 and Table 5) or were semantically related to target sounds (29.72 ± 8.73%). The other types of responses were: auditorily related (12.19 ± 6.66%), semantically and auditorily related (11.01 ± 4.20%), and “I don't know” answers (11.85 ± 20.72%) (unrecognized by patients but correctly identified by controls). Last, we coded the errors according to the sound categories by Marcell et al. (2000) (see their Table 10 for a classification of sounds according to 27 categories). We found that the 15.14% of the patients' errors involved musical instruments, 14.74% involved animal sounds, 37.45% involved other categories (e.g., transportation, nature, signals, accidents, weapons), and 32.67% involved actions/human sounds. Note that stimuli belonging to “musical instruments” and “animal sounds” are less numerous than those belonging to the “other” and “actions/human sounds” categories). For this reason, any further investigation of living vs. non-living related differences was not addressed.


Identifying environmental sounds: a multimodal mapping study.

Tomasino B, Canderan C, Marin D, Maieron M, Gremese M, D'Agostini S, Fabbro F, Skrap M - Front Hum Neurosci (2015)

(A) Overlap of the patients' lesions in standard space. MRIcron software (http://www.mccauslandcenter.sc.edu/mricro/mricron/index.html) was used to draw the patients' lesions on their T1 and T2 MRI scans, creating the ROIs which were normalized to the MNI space using the “Clinical Tool box” (http://www.mccauslandcenter.sc.edu/CRNL/clinical-toolbox) for SPM8 (http://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm/software/spm8/). The results highlighted the areas of the brain that are related to the deficit (Karnath et al., 2004). The number of overlapping lesions is illustrated by different colors that code for increasing frequencies (as indicated in the bar code). (B) Patients' pathological performance (mean accuracy) and healthy controls' accuracy and patients' qualitative analysis of errors. (C) The most frequently lesioned area (in bright green-yellow) is the hippocampus/insula/superior temporal gyrus, as shown by the Anatomy toolbox. By using Marsbar (http://marsbar.sourceforge.net/), we drew two ROIs on the two clusters found in the left and in the right STG (which were less activated in patients than controls), shown respectively in pink and in red. The density bar shows that at least 4 out of 7 patients' lesions overlapped with the ROIs drawn on the STG. (D) Network of areas commonly activated in patients and controls and areas differentially recruited by controls vs. patients during ES recognition in addition to the network for ES processing in patients and controls. Activations were superimposed on a brain template provided by spm5.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4612670&req=5

Figure 2: (A) Overlap of the patients' lesions in standard space. MRIcron software (http://www.mccauslandcenter.sc.edu/mricro/mricron/index.html) was used to draw the patients' lesions on their T1 and T2 MRI scans, creating the ROIs which were normalized to the MNI space using the “Clinical Tool box” (http://www.mccauslandcenter.sc.edu/CRNL/clinical-toolbox) for SPM8 (http://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm/software/spm8/). The results highlighted the areas of the brain that are related to the deficit (Karnath et al., 2004). The number of overlapping lesions is illustrated by different colors that code for increasing frequencies (as indicated in the bar code). (B) Patients' pathological performance (mean accuracy) and healthy controls' accuracy and patients' qualitative analysis of errors. (C) The most frequently lesioned area (in bright green-yellow) is the hippocampus/insula/superior temporal gyrus, as shown by the Anatomy toolbox. By using Marsbar (http://marsbar.sourceforge.net/), we drew two ROIs on the two clusters found in the left and in the right STG (which were less activated in patients than controls), shown respectively in pink and in red. The density bar shows that at least 4 out of 7 patients' lesions overlapped with the ROIs drawn on the STG. (D) Network of areas commonly activated in patients and controls and areas differentially recruited by controls vs. patients during ES recognition in addition to the network for ES processing in patients and controls. Activations were superimposed on a brain template provided by spm5.
Mentions: Table 4 and Figure 2 show the patients' performances on the ES confrontation naming task. Patients scored below the normal range (as measured by Z-scores). Most of the patients' responses were not related to target sounds (35.94 ± 17.21%, see Figure 2 and Table 5) or were semantically related to target sounds (29.72 ± 8.73%). The other types of responses were: auditorily related (12.19 ± 6.66%), semantically and auditorily related (11.01 ± 4.20%), and “I don't know” answers (11.85 ± 20.72%) (unrecognized by patients but correctly identified by controls). Last, we coded the errors according to the sound categories by Marcell et al. (2000) (see their Table 10 for a classification of sounds according to 27 categories). We found that the 15.14% of the patients' errors involved musical instruments, 14.74% involved animal sounds, 37.45% involved other categories (e.g., transportation, nature, signals, accidents, weapons), and 32.67% involved actions/human sounds. Note that stimuli belonging to “musical instruments” and “animal sounds” are less numerous than those belonging to the “other” and “actions/human sounds” categories). For this reason, any further investigation of living vs. non-living related differences was not addressed.

Bottom Line: These results indicate that deficits of ES recognition do not exclusively reflect lesions to the right or to the left hemisphere but both hemispheres are involved.We applied a multimodal mapping approach and found that, although the meta-analysis showed that part of the left and right STG/MTG activation during ES processing might in part be related to design choices, this area was one of the most frequently lesioned areas in our patients, thus highlighting its causal role in ES processing.We found that the ROIs we drew on the two clusters of activation found in the left and in the right STG overlapped with the lesions of at least 4 out of the 7 patients' lesions, indicating that the lack of STG activation found for patients is related to brain damage and is crucial for explaining the ES deficit.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico "E. Medea", Polo Regionale del Friuli Venezia Giulia Udine, Italy.

ABSTRACT
Our environment is full of auditory events such as warnings or hazards, and their correct recognition is essential. We explored environmental sounds (ES) recognition in a series of studies. In study 1 we performed an Activation Likelihood Estimation (ALE) meta-analysis of neuroimaging experiments addressing ES processing to delineate the network of areas consistently involved in ES processing. Areas consistently activated in the ALE meta-analysis were the STG/MTG, insula/rolandic operculum, parahippocampal gyrus and inferior frontal gyrus bilaterally. Some of these areas truly reflect ES processing, whereas others are related to design choices, e.g., type of task, type of control condition, type of stimulus. In study 2 we report on 7 neurosurgical patients with lesions involving the areas which were found to be activated by the ALE meta-analysis. We tested their ES recognition abilities and found an impairment of ES recognition. These results indicate that deficits of ES recognition do not exclusively reflect lesions to the right or to the left hemisphere but both hemispheres are involved. The most frequently lesioned area is the hippocampus/insula/STG. We made sure that any impairment in ES recognition would not be related to language problems, but reflect impaired ES processing. In study 3 we carried out an fMRI study on patients (vs. healthy controls) to investigate how the areas involved in ES might be functionally deregulated because of a lesion. The fMRI evidenced that controls activated the right IFG, the STG bilaterally and the left insula. We applied a multimodal mapping approach and found that, although the meta-analysis showed that part of the left and right STG/MTG activation during ES processing might in part be related to design choices, this area was one of the most frequently lesioned areas in our patients, thus highlighting its causal role in ES processing. We found that the ROIs we drew on the two clusters of activation found in the left and in the right STG overlapped with the lesions of at least 4 out of the 7 patients' lesions, indicating that the lack of STG activation found for patients is related to brain damage and is crucial for explaining the ES deficit.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus