Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Winter;20(2):55-61.
doi: 10.1007/s10548-007-0031-4. Epub 2007 Sep 25.

Sensitivity of EEG and MEG to the N1 and P2 auditory evoked responses modulated by spectral complexity of sounds

Antoine J Shahin  1 , Larry E Roberts, Lee M Miller, Kelly L McDonald, Claude Alain
Affiliations

Sensitivity of EEG and MEG to the N1 and P2 auditory evoked responses modulated by spectral complexity of sounds

Antoine J Shahin et al. Brain Topogr. 2007 Winter.

Abstract

Acoustic complexity of a stimulus has been shown to modulate the electromagnetic N1 (latency approximately 110 ms) and P2 (latency 190 ms) auditory evoked responses. We compared the relative sensitivity of electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) to these neural correlates of sensation. Simultaneous EEG and MEG were recorded while participants listened to three variants of a piano tone. The piano stimuli differed in their number of harmonics: the fundamental frequency (f ( 0 )), only, or f ( 0 ) and the first two or eight harmonics. The root mean square (RMS) of the amplitude of P2 but not N1 increased with spectral complexity of the piano tones in EEG and MEG. The RMS increase for P2 was more prominent in EEG than MEG, suggesting important radial sources contributing to the P2 only in EEG. Source analysis revealing contributions from radial and tangential sources was conducted to test this hypothesis. Source waveforms revealed a significant increase in the P2 radial source amplitude in EEG with increased spectral complexity of piano tones. The P2 of the tangential source waveforms also increased in amplitude with increased spectral complexity in EEG and MEG. The P2 auditory evoked response is thus represented by both tangential (gyri) and radial (sulci) activities. The radial contribution is expressed preferentially in EEG, highlighting the importance of combining EEG with MEG where complex source configurations are suspected.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
(A) Depiction of regional sources. Each regional source consists of two or three dipoles, one radial (R, EEG only) and two tangential (T1 and T2, EEG & MEG). (B) Example of auditory evoked potential (overlay of 32 traces) and field (overlay of 151 traces) for one subject, depicting the N1/P2 and N1m/P2m, respectively. Dotted line depicts the sound onset
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
(A) Source locations for the N1, N1m, P2, P2m auditory evoked responses. Dotted lines are drawn for symmetry reference. (B) Between subject mean standard deviation values (collapsing over tones and hemispheres) for source locations in the x (medial–lateral), y (anterior–posterior) and z (inferior–posterior). m (as in Xm) denotes the magnetic value
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
(A) Grand mean (n = 16) of N1 (top) and P2 (bottom) RMS values and error bars (one standard error) for piano0, piano2 and piano tones in EEG and MEG. (B) The grand mean (n = 16) of the N1 (top) and P2 (bottom) dipole moments for the radial (EEG only) and tangential components and error bars (one standard error) for piano0, piano2 and piano tones in EEG and MEG
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Hämäläinen M, Hari R, Ilmoniemi RJ, Kunuutila J, Lounasmaa OV. Magnetoencephalography: theory, instrumentation, and applications to noninvasive studies of the working human brain. Rev Modern Phys. 1993;65:413–97.
    1. Nunez PL, Srinivasan R. Electric fields of the brain: the neurophysics of EEG. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2006.
    1. Neukirch M, Hegerl U, Kotitz R, Dorn H, Gallinat J, Herrmann WM. Comparison of the amplitude/intensity function of the auditory evoked N1m and N1 components. Neuropsychobiology. 2002;45:41–8. - PubMed
    1. Cuffin BN, Cohen D. Comparison of the magnetoencephalogram and electroencephalogram. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1979;47:132–46. - PubMed
    1. Cohen D, Cuffin BN. Demonstration of useful differences between magnetoencephalogram and electroencephalogram. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1983;56:38–51. - PubMed

Publication types