(2008) Curr Biol, 18, 684–688) “
“A challenge for researc

(2008) Curr. Biol., 18, 684–688). “
“A challenge for researchers in the time-perception Selleck 3-Methyladenine field is to determine whether temporal processing is governed by a central mechanism or by multiple mechanisms working in concert. Behavioral studies of parallel timing offer interesting insights into the

question, although the conclusions fail to converge. Most of these studies focus on the number-of-clocks issue, but the commonality of memory mechanisms involved in time processing is often neglected. The present experiment aims to address a straightforward question: do signals from different modalities marking time intervals share the same clock and/or the same memory resources? To this end, an interval reproduction task involving the parallel timing of two Sirolimus mouse sensory signals presented either in the same modality or in different modalities was conducted. The memory component was tested by manipulating the delay separating the presentation of the target intervals and the moment when the reproduction of one of these began. Results show that there is more variance when only visually marked intervals

are presented, and this effect is exacerbated with longer retention delays. Finally, when there is only one interval to process, encoding the interval with signals delivered from two modalities helps to reduce variance. Taken together, these results suggest that the hypothesis stating that there are sensory-specific clock components and memory mechanisms is viable. “
“Functional neuroimaging studies have implicated a number of brain regions, especially the posterior

parietal cortex (PPC), as being potentially important for visual–tactile multisensory integration. Neratinib purchase However, neuroimaging studies are correlational and do not prove the necessity of a region for the behavioral improvements that are the hallmark of multisensory integration. To remedy this knowledge gap, we interrupted activity in the PPC, near the junction of the anterior intraparietal sulcus and the postcentral sulcus, using MRI-guided transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) while subjects localized touches delivered to different fingers. As the touches were delivered, subjects viewed a congruent touch video, an incongruent touch video, or no video. Without TMS, a strong effect of multisensory integration was observed, with significantly better behavioral performance for discrimination of congruent multisensory touch than for unisensory touch alone. Incongruent multisensory touch produced a smaller improvement in behavioral performance. TMS of the PPC eliminated the behavioral advantage of both congruent and incongruent multisensory stimuli, reducing performance to unisensory levels. These results demonstrate a causal role for the PPC in visual–tactile multisensory integration. Taken together with converging evidence from other studies, these results support a model in which the PPC contains a map of space around the hand that receives input from both the visual and somatosensory modalities.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>