Back

Travelling waves observed in MEG data can be explained by two discrete sources

Zhigalov, A.; Jensen, O.

2022-09-28 neuroscience
10.1101/2022.09.28.509870 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Growing evidence suggests that travelling waves are functionally relevant for cognitive operations in the brain. Several electroencephalography (EEG) studies report on a perceptual alpha-echo, representing the brain response to a random visual flicker, propagating as a travelling wave across the cortical surface. In this study, we ask if the propagating activity of the alpha-echo is best explained by a set of discrete sources mixing at the sensor level rather than a cortical travelling wave. To this end, we presented participants with gratings modulated by random noise and simultaneously acquired the ongoing MEG. The perceptual alpha-echo was estimated using the temporal response function linking the visual input to the brain response. At the group level, we observed a spatial decay of the amplitude of the alpha-echo with respect to the sensor where the alpha-echo was the largest. Importantly, the propagation latencies consistently increased with the distance. Interestingly, the propagation of the alpha-echoes was predominantly centro-lateral, while EEG studies reported mainly posterior-frontal propagation. Moreover, the propagation speed of the alpha-echoes derived from the MEG data was around 10 m/s, which is higher compared to the 2 m/s reported in EEG studies. Using source modelling, we found an early component in the primary visual cortex and a phase-lagged late component in the parietal cortex, which may underlie the travelling alpha-echoes at the sensor level. We then simulated the alpha-echoes using realistic EEG and MEG forward models by placing two sources in the parietal and occipital cortices in accordance with our empirical findings. The two-source model could account for both the direction and speed of the observed alpha-echoes in the EEG and MEG data. Our results demonstrate that the propagation of the perceptual echoes observed in EEG and MEG data can be explained by two sources mixing at the scalp level equally well as by a cortical travelling wave. This conclusion however does not put into question continuous travelling waves reported in intracranial recordings.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
18.7%
2
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 3%
10.4%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 10%
8.4%
4
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
6.8%
5
The Journal of Neuroscience
928 papers in training set
Top 2%
6.4%
50% of probability mass above
6
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.4%
7
Brain Topography
23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.8%
8
Imaging Neuroscience
242 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.3%
9
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.6%
10
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 46%
2.4%
11
Progress in Neurobiology
41 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.9%
12
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 40%
1.8%
13
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
119 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.7%
14
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
15
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.5%
16
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 14%
1.2%
17
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.1%
18
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
19 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
19
Cerebral Cortex
357 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
20
European Journal of Neuroscience
168 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
21
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 33%
0.7%
22
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
23
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 20%
0.7%
24
Vision Research
26 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
25
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
106 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
Neural Computation
36 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
27
Neuroscience
88 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
28
Cortex
102 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.6%
29
Neural Networks
32 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%