4.6 Article

A Neuronal Basis for Task-Negative Responses in the Human Brain

Journal

CEREBRAL CORTEX
Volume 21, Issue 4, Pages 821-830

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhq151

Keywords

calibrated fMRI; default mode network; physiological artifacts; task-independent deactivation; task-negative BOLD response

Categories

Funding

  1. Government of the Provincia Autonoma di Trento, Italy
  2. Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Trento e Rovereto
  3. University of Trento, Italy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Neuroimaging studies have revealed a number of brain regions that show a reduced blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) signal during externally directed tasks compared with a resting baseline. These regions constitute a network whose operation has become known as the default mode. The source of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) signal reductions in the default mode during task performance has not been resolved, however. It may be attributable to neuronal effects (neuronal firing), physiological effects (e.g., task vs. rest differences in respiration rate), or even increases in neuronal activity with an atypical blood response. To establish the source of signal decreases in the default mode, we used the calibrated fMRI method to quantify changes in the cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen (CMRO(2)) and cerebral blood flow (CBF) in those regions that typically show reductions in BOLD signal during a demanding cognitive task. CBF:CMRO(2) coupling during task-negative responses were linear, with a coupling constant similar to that in task-positive regions, indicating a neuronal source for signal reductions in multiple brain areas. We also identify, for the first time, two modes of neuronal activity in this network; one in which greater deactivation (characterized by metabolic rate reductions) is associated with more effort and one where it is associated with less effort.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available