Optimal check size and reversal rate to elicit pattern-reversal MEG responses
- PMID: 16018158
- DOI: 10.1017/s0317167100004005
Optimal check size and reversal rate to elicit pattern-reversal MEG responses
Abstract
Objective: To determine the impact of check size and interstimulus interval (ISI) on neuromagnetic visual cortical responses.
Methods: We recorded visual evoked fields to pattern-reversal stimulation with central occlusion in ten subjects. The -100 ms magnetic activation (P100m) was analyzed by single dipole modeling.
Results: With 1 s ISI, P100m strengths increased as check size increased from 15' up to 120' of visual arc, and larger checks elicited less P100m activation. With 120' checks, we found no P100m attenuation as ISI decreased from 4 s to 0.16 s. P100m sources around the calcarine sulcus did not vary with check size or ISI.
Conclusions: The magnitude of cortical activation during visual contrast processing is check size-dependent and the 120' checks are optimum for future studies on neuromagnetic visual cortical functions using central-occluded stimulation. The corresponding neuronal activation demonstrated a short refractory period less than 0.16 s. We also found significantly overlapping cortical representation areas for different check sizes or ISIs.
Similar articles
-
Effects of check size on pattern reversal visual evoked magnetic field and potential.Brain Res. 2000 Jul 28;872(1-2):77-86. doi: 10.1016/s0006-8993(00)02455-0. Brain Res. 2000. PMID: 10924678 Clinical Trial.
-
Visual evoked cortical magnetic responses to checkerboard pattern reversal stimulation: a study on the neural generators of N75, P100 and N145.J Neurol Sci. 1998 Apr 1;156(2):186-94. doi: 10.1016/s0022-510x(98)00026-4. J Neurol Sci. 1998. PMID: 9588856
-
Pattern reversal visual evoked responses of V1/V2 and V5/MT as revealed by MEG combined with probabilistic cytoarchitectonic maps.Neuroimage. 2006 May 15;31(1):86-108. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.11.045. Epub 2006 Feb 15. Neuroimage. 2006. PMID: 16480895
-
Human visual processing as revealed by magnetoencephalography.Int Rev Neurobiol. 2005;68:197-222. doi: 10.1016/S0074-7742(05)68008-7. Int Rev Neurobiol. 2005. PMID: 16443015 Review. No abstract available.
-
Visual Mapping With Magnetoencephalography: An Update on the Current State of Clinical Research and Practice With Considerations for Clinical Practice Guidelines.J Clin Neurophysiol. 2020 Nov;37(6):585-591. doi: 10.1097/WNP.0000000000000483. J Clin Neurophysiol. 2020. PMID: 33165231 Review.
Cited by
-
American Clinical Magnetoencephalography Society Clinical Practice Guideline 2: presurgical functional brain mapping using magnetic evoked fields.J Clin Neurophysiol. 2011 Aug;28(4):355-61. doi: 10.1097/WNP.0b013e3182272ffe. J Clin Neurophysiol. 2011. PMID: 21811122 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Source estimates for MEG/EEG visual evoked responses constrained by multiple, retinotopically-mapped stimulus locations.Hum Brain Mapp. 2009 Apr;30(4):1290-309. doi: 10.1002/hbm.20597. Hum Brain Mapp. 2009. PMID: 18570197 Free PMC article.
-
Early Visual Processing is Affected by Clinical Subtype in Patients with Unilateral Spatial Neglect: A Magnetoencephalography Study.Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Jul 31;7:432. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00432. eCollection 2013. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013. PMID: 23914171 Free PMC article.
-
Influence of visual angle on pattern reversal visual evoked potentials.Oman J Ophthalmol. 2014 Sep;7(3):120-5. doi: 10.4103/0974-620X.142593. Oman J Ophthalmol. 2014. PMID: 25378875 Free PMC article.
-
Visual field asymmetries in visual evoked responses.J Vis. 2014 Dec 19;14(14):13. doi: 10.1167/14.14.13. J Vis. 2014. PMID: 25527151 Free PMC article.