4.8 Article

A neural population selective for song in human auditory cortex

期刊

CURRENT BIOLOGY
卷 32, 期 7, 页码 1470-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2022.01.069

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [DP1 HD091947, P41-EB018783, P50-MH109429, R01-EB026439, U24-NS109103, U01-NS108916, R25-HD088157, K99DC018051-01A1]
  2. US Army Research Office [W911NF-15-1-0440]
  3. National Science Foundation [BCS-1634050]
  4. NSF Science and Technology Center for Brains, and Machines [CCF-1231216]
  5. Fondazione Neurone
  6. Howard Hughes Medical Institute (LSRF Postdoctoral Fellowship)
  7. Kristin R. Pressman and Jessica J. Pourian '13 Fund at MIT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study developed a new method to investigate the neural code for music in the human auditory cortex using intracranial responses and fMRI. The results revealed that representations of music are fractionated into subpopulations selective for different types of music, with one subpopulation specialized for the analysis of songs.
How is music represented in the brain? While neuroimaging has revealed some spatial segregation between responses to music versus other sounds, little is known about the neural code for music itself. To address this question, we developed a method to infer canonical response components of human auditory cortex using intracranial responses to natural sounds, and further used the superior coverage of fMRI to map their spatial distribution. The inferred components replicated many prior findings, including distinct neural selectivity for speech and music, but also revealed a novel component that responded nearly exclusively to music with singing. Song selectivity was not explainable by standard acoustic features, was located near speech- and music-selective responses, and was also evident in individual electrodes. These results suggest that representations of music are fractionated into subpopulations selective for different types of music, one of which is specialized for the analysis of song.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据