Skip to main content

Umbrella menu

  • SfN.org
  • eNeuro
  • The Journal of Neuroscience
  • Neuronline
  • BrainFacts.org

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Latest Articles
    • Issue Archive
    • Editorials
    • Research Highlights
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • BLOG
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SfN.org
  • eNeuro
  • The Journal of Neuroscience
  • Neuronline
  • BrainFacts.org

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro
  • My alerts

eNeuro

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Latest Articles
    • Issue Archive
    • Editorials
    • Research Highlights
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • BLOG
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
PreviousNext
Research ArticleResearch Article: New Research, Cognition and Behavior

Effects of Neuronic Shutter Observed in the EEG Alpha Rhythm

Kevin E. Alexander, Justin R. Estepp and Sherif M. Elbasiouny
eNeuro 23 September 2020, 7 (5) ENEURO.0171-20.2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0171-20.2020
Kevin E. Alexander
1Department of Biomedical, Industrial, and Human Factors Engineering, College of Engineering and Computer Science, Wright State University, Dayton, OH 45435
4Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Kevin E. Alexander
Justin R. Estepp
1Department of Biomedical, Industrial, and Human Factors Engineering, College of Engineering and Computer Science, Wright State University, Dayton, OH 45435
2711th Human Performance Wing, Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Justin R. Estepp
Sherif M. Elbasiouny
1Department of Biomedical, Industrial, and Human Factors Engineering, College of Engineering and Computer Science, Wright State University, Dayton, OH 45435
3Department of Neuroscience, Cell Biology, and Physiology, Boonshoft School of Medicine and College of Science and Mathematics, Wright State University, Dayton, OH 45435
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Sherif M. Elbasiouny
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    A, According to the cruciform model of the calcarine fissure in the V1 cortical area, the lower portion of the fissure will respond to upper visual field stimuli and vice versa for the upper portion of the fissure. For this reason, and as the upper and lower portions of the fissure contain opposing dipoles, upper and lower visual field stimuli will create waveforms of opposing polarity in the EEG. B, Upper and lower visual field stimuli used for C1 VEP task are centered 3° below the fixation point to account for the overrepresentation of the lower visual field in the calcerine fissure as shown in A. C, C1 VEP from a single participant in response to the upper and lower stimuli, the difference was measured as the lower minus the upper VEP. The peak latency of the difference wave (indicated as +) was used as the estimate of t2.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Example of the staircase method used to determine the threshold intensity in a single participant. Each time the participant observed the stimulus, the intensity in the next trial was decreased. If the participant did not observe the stimulus in one trial, the intensity was increased in the next trial. Threshold intensity was determined as the average intensity of all trials (trials 6–40 in this example) following the third reversal, or corner, in the trial-intensity trace (trial 5 in this example). The dashed threshold intensity line in this figure spans the trials over which the intensities were averaged.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Each of the 20 participants’ α peak-to-peak amplitude distribution for all trials used in the analysis at t2.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    C1 VEP component averaged across all participants in response to upper and lower visual field stimuli. The difference waveform is the lower waveform subtracted from the upper waveform. The mean and range of each participant’s estimated retina-to-V1 conduction delay (t2) is indicated and was calculated as the peak latency of the C1 component in each individual’s difference waveform.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Mean change in OR (ΔOR) for each amplitude and phase condition relative to mean OR across all conditions when analysis was conducted at t2 (error bars indicate standard error). Tukey’s HSD tests were performed between phase levels within amplitude conditions with significance indicated by *. Bonferroni corrected t tests compared each mean to zero with significance indicated by #; 90° = peak; *,#p ≤ 0.05; **,##p ≤ 0.01; ***,###p ≤ 0.001; ****,####p ≤ 0.0001.

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    ΔOR as a function of phase for each participant in the high-amplitude and low-amplitude conditions with radial axis extending to negative values for analysis conducted at t2. The preferred phase is indicated on the circumference, calculated as the direction toward the circle’s center of mass; 90° = peak.

  • Figure 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7.

    Analysis conducted at t2. A, C, ΔOR as a function of phase, with radial axis extending to negative values. B, D, Individual participants’ preferred phase angles; their magnitude is proportional their individual PPE. The width and height of the shaded rectangles indicate, respectively, the x and y 95% CI in cartesian space. In all panels, the group mean preferred phase is indicated in black on the circumference of the diagrams, with the shaded region indicating estimated 95% CIs for each amplitude condition; 90° = peak.

  • Figure 8.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 8.

    Change in α amplitude, relative to a −300 to −100 ms baseline interval (A), and α phase coherence for observed, missed, and all stimuli together (B). The arrow indicates a peak in the missed trial phase coherence reflecting the time point were α phase best predicts that a trial will be unobserved by the participant. There was no indication of stimulus-induced effects at the t2 time point where phase and amplitude measures were hypothesized to be of mechanistic relevance.

  • Figure 9.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 9.

    Analysis conducted at t = −100 ms. A, C, ΔOR as a function of phase, with radial axis extending to negative values. B, D, Individual participants’ preferred phase angles; their magnitude is proportional their individual PPE. The width and height of the shaded rectangles indicate, respectively, the x and y 95% CI in cartesian space. In all panels, the group mean preferred phase is indicated in black on the circumference of the diagrams, with the shaded region indicating estimated 95% CIs for each amplitude condition; 90° = peak.

  • Figure 10.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 10.

    Mean change in OR (ΔOR) for each amplitude and phase condition relative to mean OR across all conditions when analysis was conducted at t = −100 ms (error bars indicate standard error). Tukey’s HSD tests were performed between phase levels within amplitude conditions with significance indicated by *. Bonferroni corrected did not find any of the means to significantly differ from zero; 90° = peak; *p ≤ 0.05.

  • Figure 11.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 11.

    Visual pathway from retina to V1. The LGN/RN negative feedback loop provides a mechanism of cycling LGN excitability state. This LGN/RN network is known to give rise to sleep spindles. The same, or a similar, mechanism is expected to give rise the posterior α rhythm.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Two (amplitude) × four (phase) within-subjects repeated measures ANOVA results

    SourceStatisticpEmbedded Image Power
    PhaseF(3,57) = 7.9710.00020.29550.986
    AmplitudeF(1,19) = 1.7510.20140.08440.242
    Phase × amplitudeF(3,57) = 3.7700.01540.16560.786
    • View popup
    Table 2

    Two (amplitude) × four (phase) within-subjects repeated measures ANOVA results repeated at 100 ms before stimulus onset

    SourceStatisticpEmbedded Image Power
    PhaseF(3,57) = 3.3780.02430.15100.735
    AmplitudeF(1,19) = 0.0080.92890.00040.051
    Phase × amplitudeF(3,57) = 1.6950.17840.08190.420
Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 7 (5)
eNeuro
Vol. 7, Issue 5
September/October 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for sharing this eNeuro article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Effects of Neuronic Shutter Observed in the EEG Alpha Rhythm
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from eNeuro
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in eNeuro.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Effects of Neuronic Shutter Observed in the EEG Alpha Rhythm
Kevin E. Alexander, Justin R. Estepp, Sherif M. Elbasiouny
eNeuro 23 September 2020, 7 (5) ENEURO.0171-20.2020; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0171-20.2020

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Effects of Neuronic Shutter Observed in the EEG Alpha Rhythm
Kevin E. Alexander, Justin R. Estepp, Sherif M. Elbasiouny
eNeuro 23 September 2020, 7 (5) ENEURO.0171-20.2020; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0171-20.2020
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Significance Statement
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
    • Synthesis
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • alpha rhythm
  • EEG
  • visual-evoked potential
  • neuronic shutter
  • visual conduction delay

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Research Article: New Research

  • Differential Impact of Inhibitory G-Protein Signaling Pathways in Ventral Tegmental Area Dopamine Neurons on Behavioral Sensitivity to Cocaine and Morphine
  • Activation of Transient Receptor Potential Vanilloid 1 Channels in the Nucleus of the Solitary Tract and Activation of Dynorphin Input to the Median Preoptic Nucleus Contribute to Impaired BAT Thermogenesis in Diet-Induced Obesity
  • The Substantia Nigra Pars Reticulata Modulates Error-Based Saccadic Learning in Monkeys
Show more Research Article: New Research

Cognition and Behavior

  • Differential Impact of Inhibitory G-Protein Signaling Pathways in Ventral Tegmental Area Dopamine Neurons on Behavioral Sensitivity to Cocaine and Morphine
  • Activation of Transient Receptor Potential Vanilloid 1 Channels in the Nucleus of the Solitary Tract and Activation of Dynorphin Input to the Median Preoptic Nucleus Contribute to Impaired BAT Thermogenesis in Diet-Induced Obesity
  • The Substantia Nigra Pars Reticulata Modulates Error-Based Saccadic Learning in Monkeys
Show more Cognition and Behavior

Subjects

  • Cognition and Behavior
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Issue Archive
  • Blog
  • Browse by Topic

Information

  • For Authors
  • For the Media

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2021 by the Society for Neuroscience.
eNeuro eISSN: 2373-2822

The ideas and opinions expressed in eNeuro do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the eNeuro Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in eNeuro should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in eNeuro.