» Articles » PMID: 24204221

Attention-dependent Modulation of Cortical Taste Circuits Revealed by Granger Causality with Signal-dependent Noise

Overview
Specialty Biology
Date 2013 Nov 9
PMID 24204221
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

We show, for the first time, that in cortical areas, for example the insular, orbitofrontal, and lateral prefrontal cortex, there is signal-dependent noise in the fMRI blood-oxygen level dependent (BOLD) time series, with the variance of the noise increasing approximately linearly with the square of the signal. Classical Granger causal models are based on autoregressive models with time invariant covariance structure, and thus do not take this signal-dependent noise into account. To address this limitation, here we describe a Granger causal model with signal-dependent noise, and a novel, likelihood ratio test for causal inferences. We apply this approach to the data from an fMRI study to investigate the source of the top-down attentional control of taste intensity and taste pleasantness processing. The Granger causality with signal-dependent noise analysis reveals effects not identified by classical Granger causal analysis. In particular, there is a top-down effect from the posterior lateral prefrontal cortex to the insular taste cortex during attention to intensity but not to pleasantness, and there is a top-down effect from the anterior and posterior lateral prefrontal cortex to the orbitofrontal cortex during attention to pleasantness but not to intensity. In addition, there is stronger forward effective connectivity from the insular taste cortex to the orbitofrontal cortex during attention to pleasantness than during attention to intensity. These findings indicate the importance of explicitly modeling signal-dependent noise in functional neuroimaging, and reveal some of the processes involved in a biased activation theory of selective attention.

Citing Articles

Predicting attentional focus: Heartbeat-evoked responses and brain dynamics during interoceptive and exteroceptive processing.

Flo E, Belloli L, Cabana A, Ruyant-Belabbas A, Jodaitis L, Valente M PNAS Nexus. 2024; 3(12):pgae531.

PMID: 39677366 PMC: 11645458. DOI: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae531.


Orbitofrontal cortex conveys stimulus and task information to the auditory cortex.

Mittelstadt J, Kanold P Curr Biol. 2023; 33(19):4160-4173.e4.

PMID: 37716349 PMC: 10602585. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2023.08.059.


Emotion, motivation, decision-making, the orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, and the amygdala.

Rolls E Brain Struct Funct. 2023; 228(5):1201-1257.

PMID: 37178232 PMC: 10250292. DOI: 10.1007/s00429-023-02644-9.


Functional Connectivity of the Chemosenses: A Review.

Farruggia M, Pellegrino R, Scheinost D Front Syst Neurosci. 2022; 16:865929.

PMID: 35813269 PMC: 9257046. DOI: 10.3389/fnsys.2022.865929.


Mind Causality: A Computational Neuroscience Approach.

Rolls E Front Comput Neurosci. 2021; 15:706505.

PMID: 34305562 PMC: 8295486. DOI: 10.3389/fncom.2021.706505.


References
1.
Kouneiher F, Charron S, Koechlin E . Motivation and cognitive control in the human prefrontal cortex. Nat Neurosci. 2009; 12(7):939-45. DOI: 10.1038/nn.2321. View

2.
Sakai K, Passingham R . Prefrontal interactions reflect future task operations. Nat Neurosci. 2002; 6(1):75-81. DOI: 10.1038/nn987. View

3.
DeSimone R, Duncan J . Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annu Rev Neurosci. 1995; 18:193-222. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.ne.18.030195.001205. View

4.
Rolls E, Grabenhorst F, Deco G . Choice, difficulty, and confidence in the brain. Neuroimage. 2010; 53(2):694-706. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.06.073. View

5.
Beck D, Kastner S . Top-down and bottom-up mechanisms in biasing competition in the human brain. Vision Res. 2008; 49(10):1154-65. PMC: 2740806. DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2008.07.012. View