Evaluating an acoustically quiet EPI sequence for use in fMRI studies of speech and auditory processing

NeuroImage

Volumn 52, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 1410-1419

  Peelle, Jonathan E ^a   Eason, Rowena J ^a   Schmitter, Sebastian ^b   Schwarzbauer, Christian ^a   Davis, Matthew H ^a  

^a MRC COGNITION AND BRAIN SCIENCES UNIT   (United Kingdom)

^b GERMAN CANCER RESEARCH CENTER DKFZ   (Germany)

Author keywords

BOLD sensitivity; Listening effort; Quiet EPI; Sparse imaging

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY CORTEX; AUDITORY DISCRIMINATION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; BRAIN REGION; CONTROLLED STUDY; ECHO PLANAR IMAGING; FEMALE; FRONTAL CORTEX; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PARIETAL LOBE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; TEMPORAL CORTEX; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; VOLUNTEER;

ADULT; AUDITORY CORTEX; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; ECHO-PLANAR IMAGING; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; NOISE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 77954957253     PISSN: 10538119     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.05.015     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Aguirre G.K., Zarahn E., D'Esposito M. The variability of human, BOLD hemodynamic responses. NeuroImage 1998, 8:360-369.
2. Ashburner J., Friston K.J. Multimodal image coregistration and partitioning - a unified framework. NeuroImage 1997, 6:209-217.
3. Ashburner J., Friston K.J. Unified segmentation. NeuroImage 2005, 26:839-851.
4. Awad M., Warren J.E., Scott S.K., Turkheimer F.E., Wise R.J.S. A common system for the comprehension and production of narrative speech. J. Neurosci. 2007, 27:11455-11464.
5. Bandettini P.A., Jesmanowicz A., Van Kylen J., Birn R.M., Hyde J.S. Functional MRI of brain activation induced by scanner acoustic noise. Magn. Reson. Med. 1998, 39:410-416.
6. Bates E., Wilson S.M., Saygin A.P., Dick F., Sereno M.I., Knight R.T., Dronkers N.F. Voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping. Nat. Neurosci. 2003, 6:448-450.
7. Binder J.R., Frost J.A., Hammeke T.A., Bellgowan P.S., Springer J.A., Kaufman J.N., Possing E.T. Human temporal lobe activation by speech and nonspeech sounds. Cereb. Cortex 2000, 10:512-528.
8. Chait M., Poeppel D., de Cheveigné A., Simon J.Z. Processing asymmetry of transitions between order and disorder in human auditory cortex. J. Neurosci. 2007, 27:5207-5214.
9. Chambers J., Bullock D., Kahana Y., Kots A., Palmer A. Developments in active noise control sound system for magnetic resonance imaging. Appl Acoust 2007, 68:281-295.
10. Crinion J.T., Lambon Ralph M.A., Warburton E.A, Howard D., Wise R.J.S, Hyde J.S. Temporal lobe regions engaged during normal speech comprehension. Brain 2003, 126:1193-1201.
11. Cusack R., Brett M., Osswald K. An evaluation of the use of magnetic field maps to undistort echo-planar images. NeuroImage 2003, 18:127-142.
12. Davis M.H., Gaskell M.G. A complementary systems account of word learning: neural and behavioural evidence. Philos. Roy. Soc. B 2009, 364:3773-3800.
13. Davis M.H., Johnsrude I.S. Hierarchical processing in spoken language comprehension. J. Neurosci. 2003, 23:3423-3431.
14. Davis M.H., Coleman M.R., Absalom A.R., Rodd J.M., Johnsrude I.S., Matta B.F., Owen A.M., Menon D.K. Dissociating speech perception and comprehension at reduced levels of awareness. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2007, 104:16032-16037.
15. De Panfilis C., Schwarzbauer C. Positive or negative blips? The effect of phase encoding scheme on susceptibility-induced signal losses in EPI. NeuroImage 2005, 25:112-121.
16. Devlin J.T., Russell R.P., Davis M.H., Price C.J., Wilson J., Moss H.E., Matthews P.M., Tyler L.K. Susceptibility-induced loss of signal: comparing PET and fMRI on a semantic task. NeuroImage 2000, 11:589-600.
17. Edmister W.B., Talavage T.M., Ledden P.J., Weisskoff R.M. Improved auditory cortex imaging using clustered volume acquisitions. Hum. Brain Mapp. 1999, 7:89-97.
18. Eickhoff S., Stephan K., Mohlberg H., Grefkes C., Fink G., Amunts K., Zilles K. A new SPM toolbox for combining probabilistic cytoarchitectonic maps and functional imaging data. NeuroImage 2005, 25:1325-1335.
19. Elliott M.R., Bowtell R.W., Morris P.G. The effect of scanner sound in visual, motor, and auditory functional MRI. Magn. Reson. Med. 1999, 41:1230-1235.
20. Friston K.J., Ashburner J., Frith C.D., Poline J.-B., Heather J.D., Frackowiak R.S.J. Spatial registration and normalization of images. Hum. Brain Mapp. 1995, 2:165-189.
21. Gaab N., Gabrieli J.D.E., Glover G.H. Assessing the influence of scanner background noise on auditory processing. II. An fMRI study comparing auditory processing in the absence and presence of recorded scanner noise using a sparse design. Hum. Brain Mapp. 2007, 28:721-732.
22. Giraud A.-L., Lorenzi C., Ashburner J., Wable J., Johnsrude I., Frackowiak R., Kleinschmidt A. Representation of the temporal envelope of sounds in the human brain. J. Neurophysiol. 2000, 84:1588-1598.
23. Grimault N., Micheyl C., Carlyon R.P., Arthaud P., Collet L. Perceptual auditory stream segregation of sequences of complex sounds in subjects with normal and impaired hearing. Br. J. Audiol. 2001, 35:173-182.
24. Hall D.A., Haggard M.P., Akeroyd M.A., Palmer A.R., Summerfield A.Q., Elliott M.R., Gurney E.M., Bowtell R.W. "Sparse" temporal sampling in auditory fMRI. Hum. Brain Mapp. 1999, 7:213-223.
25. Hall D.A., Summerfield A.Q., Gonçalves M.S., Foster J.R., Palmer A.R., Bowtell R.W. Time-course of the auditory BOLD response to scanner noise. Magn. Reson. Med. 2000, 43:601-606.
26. Hall D.A., Chambers J., Akeroyd M.A., Foster J.R. Acoustic, psychophysical, and neuroimaging measurements of the effectiveness of active cancellation during auditory functional magnetic resonance imaging. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2009, 125:347-359.
27. Haller S., Bartsch A.J., Radue E.W., Klarhöfer M., Seifritz E., Scheffler K. Effect of fMRI acoustic noise on non-auditory working memory task: comparison between continuous and pulsed sound emitting EPI. Magn. Reson. Mater. Phys. 2005, 18:263-271.
28. Harms M.P., Melcher J.R. Sound repetition rate in the human auditory pathway: representations in the waveshape and amplitude of fMRI activation. J. Neurophysiol. 2002, 88:1433-1450.
29. Herdener M., Esposito F., Di Salle F., Lehmann C., Bach D.R., Scheffler K., Seifritz E. BOLD correlates of edge detection in human auditory cortex. NeuroImage 2007, 36:194-201.
30. Hickok G., Poeppel D. The cortical organization of speech processing. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2007, 8:393-402.
31. Jenkinson M. Fast, automated N-dimensional phase-unwrapping algorithm. Magn. Reson. Med. 2003, 49:193-197.
32. Krüger G., Glover G.H. Physiological noise in oxygenation-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging. Magn. Reson. Med. 2001, 46:631-637.
33. Loftus G.R., Masson M.E.J. Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 1994, 1:476-490.
34. Moelker A., Pattynama P.M.T. Acoustic noise concerns in functional magnetic resonance imaging. Hum. Brain Mapp. 2003, 20:123-141.
35. Morosan P., Rademacher J., Schleicher A., Amunts K., Schormann T., Zilles K. Human primary auditory cortex: cytoarchitectonic subdivisions and mapping into a spatial reference system. NeuroImage 2001, 13:684-701.
36. Mummery C.J., Ashburner J., Scott S.K., Wise R.J. Functional neuroimaging of speech perception in six normal and two aphasic subjects. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1999, 106:449-457.
37. Ojemann J.G., Akbudak E., Snyder A.Z., McKinstry R.C., Raichle M.E., Conturo T.E. Anatomic localization and quantitative analysis of gradient refocused echo-planar fMRI susceptibility artifacts. NeuroImage 1997, 6:156-167.
38. Orfanidou E., Marslen-Wilson W.D., Davis M.H. Neural response suppression predicts repetition priming of spoken words and pseudowords. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2006, 18:1237-1252.
39. Peelle J.E., Wingfield A. Dissociations in perceptual learning revealed by adult age differences in adaptation to time-compressed speech. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2005, 31:1315-1330.
40. Poldrack R.A., Fletcher P.C., Henson R.N., Worsley K.J., Brett M., Nichols T.E. Guidelines for reporting an fMRI study. NeuroImage 2008, 40:409-414.
41. Price C.J. The anatomy of language: contributions from functional neuroimaging. J. Anat. 2000, 197:335-359.
42. Price D.L., De Wilde J.P., Papadaki A.M., Curran J.S., Kitney R.I. Investigation of acoustic noise on 15 MRI scanners from 0.2T to 3T. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2001, 13:288-293.
43. Ravicz M.E., Melcher J.R., Kiang N.Y.-S. Acoustic noise during functional magnetic resonance imaging. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2000, 108:1683-1696.
44. Rodd J.M., Davis M.H., Johnsrude I.S. The neural mechanisms of speech comprehension: fMRI studies of semantic ambiguity. Cereb. Cortex 2005, 15:1261-1269.
45. Rorden C., Brett M. Stereotaxic display of brain lesions. Behav. Neurol. 2000, 12:191-2000.
46. Scheffler K., Bilecen D., Schmid N., Tschopp K., Seelig J. Auditory cortical responses in hearing subjects and unilateral deaf patients as detected by functional magnetic resonance imaging. Cereb. Cortex 1998, 8:156-163.
47. Schmitter S., Diesch E., Amann M., Kroll A., Moayer M., Schad L.R. Silent echo-planar imaging for auditory FMRI. Magn. Reson. Mater. Phys. 2008, 21:317-325.
48. Schroeder M.R. Reference signal for signal quality studies. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1968, 44:1735-1736.
49. Schwarzbauer C., Davis M.H., Rodd J.M., Johnsrude I. Interleaved silent steady state (ISSS) imaging: a new sparse imaging method applied to auditory fMRI. NeuroImage 2006, 29:774-782.
50. Seifritz E., Di Salle F., Esposito F., Bilecen D., Neuhoff J.G., Scheffler K. Sustained blood oxygenation and volume response to repetition rate-modulated sound in human auditory cortex. NeuroImage 2003, 20:1365-1370.
51. Seifritz E., Di Salle F., Esposito F., Herdener M., Neuhoff J.G., Scheffler K. Enhancing BOLD response in the auditory system by neurophysiologically tuned fMRI sequence. NeuroImage 2006, 29:1013-1022.
52. Talavage T.M., Edmister W.B., Ledden P.J., Weisskoff R.M. Quantitative assessment of auditory cortex responses induced by imager acoustic noise. Hum. Brain Mapp. 1999, 7:79-88.
53. Tanaka H., Fujita N., Watanabe Y., Hirabuki N., Takanashi M., Oshiro Y., Nakamura H. Effects of stimulus rate on the auditory cortex using fMRI with 'sparse' temporal sampling. NeuroReport 2000, 11:2045-2049.
54. Van Casteren M., Davis M.H. Match: a program to assist in matching the conditions of factorial experiments. Behav. Res. Meth. 2007, 39:973-978.
55. Weiskopf N., Hutton C., Josephs O., Turner R., Deichmann R. Optimized EPI for fMRI studies of the orbitofrontal cortex: compensation of susceptibility-induced gradients in the readout direction. Magn. Reson. Mater. Phys. 2007, 20:39-49.
56. Wingfield A., McCoy S.L., Peelle J.E., Tun P.A., Cox C. Effects of adult aging and hearing loss on comprehension of rapid speech varying in syntactic complexity. J. Am. Acad. Audiol. 2006, 17:487-497.
57. Worsley K.J., Evans A.C., Marrett S., Neelin P. A three-dimensional statistical analysis for CBF activation studies in human brain. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 1992, 12:900-918.