Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26673114›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2016

The origins of metamodality in visual object area LO: Bodily topographical biases and increased functional connectivity to S1.

Zohar Tal, Ran Geva, Amir Amedi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Brain circuit-gene expression relationships and neuroplasticity of multisensory cortices in blind children.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Expert Tool Users Show Increased Differentiation between Visual Representations of Hands and Tools.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Artificial limb representation in amputees.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Zohar TalDepartment of Medical Neurobiology, Institute of Medical Research Israel - Canada (IMRIC), Faculty of Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91220, Israel. Electronic address: zohar.tal@mail.huji.ac.il.
Ran GevaDepartment of Medical Neurobiology, Institute of Medical Research Israel - Canada (IMRIC), Faculty of Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91220, Israel.
Amir AmediDepartment of Medical Neurobiology, Institute of Medical Research Israel - Canada (IMRIC), Faculty of Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91220, Israel; The Edmond and Lily Safra Center for Brain Science (ELSC), The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91220, Israel; Program of Cognitive Science, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91220, Israel.

Funding

European Research Council 310809
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent evidence from blind participants suggests that visual areas are task-oriented and sensory modality input independent rather than sensory-specific to vision. Specifically, visual areas are thought to retain their functional selectivity when using non-visual inputs (touch or sound) even without having any visual experience. However, this theory is still controversial since it is not clear whether this also characterizes the sighted brain, and whether the reported results in the sighted reflect basic fundamental a-modal processes or are an epiphenomenon to a large extent. In the current study, we addressed these questions using a series of fMRI experiments aimed to explore visual cortex responses to passive touch on various body parts and the coupling between the parietal and visual cortices as manifested by functional connectivity. We show that passive touch robustly activated the object selective parts of the lateral-occipital (LO) cortex while deactivating almost all other occipital-retinotopic-areas. Furthermore, passive touch responses in the visual cortex were specific to hand and upper trunk stimulations. Psychophysiological interaction (PPI) analysis suggests that LO is functionally connected to the hand area in the primary somatosensory homunculus (S1), during hand and shoulder stimulations but not to any of the other body parts. We suggest that LO is a fundamental hub that serves as a node between visual-object selective areas and S1 hand representation, probably due to the critical evolutionary role of touch in object recognition and manipulation. These results might also point to a more general principle suggesting that recruitment or deactivation of the visual cortex by other sensory input depends on the ecological relevance of the information conveyed by this input to the task/computations carried out by each area or network. This is likely to rely on the unique and differential pattern of connectivity for each visual area with the rest of the brain.

Indexed as

Brain MappingAdultFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeural PathwaysPhotic StimulationPhysical StimulationTouch PerceptionVisual CortexVisual PerceptionYoung AdultConnectivityCross-modalfMRISomatosensoryVisual

Identifiers

PMID26673114
PMCPMC4758827

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.