Bypassing Input to V1 in Visual Awareness: A TMS-EROS Investigation

Overview

Journal Neuropsychologia

Specialties Neurology
Psychology

Date 2024 Mar 23

PMID 38521150

Authors

Ramisha S Knight

Tao Chen

Evan G Center

Gabriele Gratton

Monica Fabiani

Silvia Savazzi

Chiara Mazzi

Diane M Beck

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Early visual cortex (V1-V3) is believed to be critical for normal visual awareness by providing the necessary feedforward input. However, it remains unclear whether visual awareness can occur without further involvement of early visual cortex, such as re-entrant feedback. It has been challenging to determine the importance of feedback activity to these areas because of the difficulties in dissociating this activity from the initial feedforward activity. Here, we applied single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the left posterior parietal cortex to elicit phosphenes in the absence of direct visual input to early visual cortex. Immediate neural activity after the TMS pulse was assessed using the event-related optical signal (EROS), which can measure activity under the TMS coil without artifacts. Our results show that: 1) The activity in posterior parietal cortex 50 ms after TMS was related to phosphene awareness, and 2) Activity related to awareness was observed in a small portion of V1 140 ms after TMS, but in contrast (3) Activity in V2 was a more robust correlate of awareness. Together, these results are consistent with interactive models proposing that sustained and recurrent loops of activity between cortical areas are necessary for visual awareness to emerge. In addition, we observed phosphene-related activations of the anteromedial cuneus and lateral occipital cortex, suggesting a functional network subserving awareness comprising these regions, the parietal cortex and early visual cortex.

References

Tong F . Primary visual cortex and visual awareness. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2003; 4(3):219-29. DOI: 10.1038/nrn1055. View

Center E, Knight R, Fabiani M, Gratton G, Beck D . Examining the role of feedback in TMS-induced visual suppression: A cautionary tale. Conscious Cogn. 2019; 75:102805. DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2019.102805. View

Fahrenfort J, Scholte H, Lamme V . The spatiotemporal profile of cortical processing leading up to visual perception. J Vis. 2008; 8(1):12.1-12. DOI: 10.1167/8.1.12. View

Rossi S, Hallett M, Rossini P, Pascual-Leone A . Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research. Clin Neurophysiol. 2009; 120(12):2008-2039. PMC: 3260536. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.08.016. View

Miranda P, Hallett M, Basser P . The electric field induced in the brain by magnetic stimulation: a 3-D finite-element analysis of the effect of tissue heterogeneity and anisotropy. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2003; 50(9):1074-85. DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2003.816079. View

Gratton G, Sarno A, Maclin E, Corballis P, Fabiani M . Toward noninvasive 3-D imaging of the time course of cortical activity: investigation of the depth of the event-related optical signal. Neuroimage. 2000; 11(5 Pt 1):491-504. DOI: 10.1006/nimg.2000.0565. View

Paulus W, Korinth S, Wischer S, Tergau F . Differential inhibition of chromatic and achromatic perception by transcranial magnetic stimulation of the human visual cortex. Neuroreport. 1999; 10(6):1245-8. DOI: 10.1097/00001756-199904260-00017. View

Silvanto J, Cattaneo Z, Battelli L, Pascual-Leone A . Baseline cortical excitability determines whether TMS disrupts or facilitates behavior. J Neurophysiol. 2008; 99(5):2725-30. PMC: 3533239. DOI: 10.1152/jn.01392.2007. View

McKeefry D, Gouws A, Burton M, Morland A . The noninvasive dissection of the human visual cortex: using FMRI and TMS to study the organization of the visual brain. Neuroscientist. 2009; 15(5):489-506. DOI: 10.1177/1073858409334424. View

10.

Pascual-Leone A, Walsh V . Fast backprojections from the motion to the primary visual area necessary for visual awareness. Science. 2001; 292(5516):510-2. DOI: 10.1126/science.1057099. View

11.

Mazzi C, Mazzeo G, Savazzi S . Markers of TMS-evoked visual conscious experience in a patient with altitudinal hemianopia. Conscious Cogn. 2017; 54:143-154. DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2017.01.022. View

12.

Hansen B, Haun A, Johnson A, Ellemberg D . On the Differentiation of Foveal and Peripheral Early Visual Evoked Potentials. Brain Topogr. 2016; 29(4):506-14. DOI: 10.1007/s10548-016-0475-5. View

13.

Kammer T, Puls K, Erb M, Grodd W . Transcranial magnetic stimulation in the visual system. II. Characterization of induced phosphenes and scotomas. Exp Brain Res. 2004; 160(1):129-40. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-004-1992-0. View

14.

Rees G, Kreiman G, Koch C . Neural correlates of consciousness in humans. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2002; 3(4):261-70. DOI: 10.1038/nrn783. View

15.

Koivisto M, Revonsuo A . The role of selective attention in visual awareness of stimulus features: electrophysiological studies. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2008; 8(2):195-210. DOI: 10.3758/cabn.8.2.195. View

16.

Aru J, Bachmann T, Singer W, Melloni L . Distilling the neural correlates of consciousness. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2011; 36(2):737-46. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2011.12.003. View

17.

Stensaas S, Eddington D, Dobelle W . The topography and variability of the primary visual cortex in man. J Neurosurg. 1974; 40(6):747-55. DOI: 10.3171/jns.1974.40.6.0747. View

18.

Baars B . Global workspace theory of consciousness: toward a cognitive neuroscience of human experience. Prog Brain Res. 2005; 150:45-53. DOI: 10.1016/S0079-6123(05)50004-9. View

19.

Dehaene S, Changeux J . Experimental and theoretical approaches to conscious processing. Neuron. 2011; 70(2):200-27. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.03.018. View

20.

Hagler Jr D . Visual field asymmetries in visual evoked responses. J Vis. 2014; 14(14):13. PMC: 4274841. DOI: 10.1167/14.14.13. View