Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Phase-matching task. Participants controlled a photorealistic VH model with a data glove worn on their right hand. In all experimental conditions, the RH was occluded from view, while the VH was visible at all times. Participants had to match the oscillatory phase of a virtual target (fixation dot, changing its size sinusoidally at 0.5 Hz) with grasping movements (i.e., open at maximum target size, closed at minimum size). Thereby, participants were instructed to match the oscillatory phase of the target with the grasping movements of either the VH or the unseen RH (while ignoring the movements of the VH). These instructions induced a specific task set, in which either visual or proprioceptive hand movement information was task relevant. In half of all trials, RH and VH moved congruently (“congruent”), while in the other half of the trials (“incongruent”) the movements of the VH were delayed with respect to the actually executed movements (RH); this introduced visuoproprioceptive incongruence. Reprinted from Limanowski et al. (2020). Copyright Elsevier (2020) under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY license.
- Figure 2.
BOLD signal increases related to phase-matching inaccuracy. The renders (left) and slice overlays (right) show brain areas in which hemodynamic activity was correlated with the relative inaccuracy of hand–target phase matching (displayed at p < 0.001, uncorrected). Significant activations (pFWE < 0.05; voxels outlined in blue on the slice overlays) were located in the bilateral FO, the left SMA, and the left dlPFC.
- Figure 3.
Spectral gamma power increases related to phase-matching inaccuracy. A, The “glass brain” (maximum intensity) projections show the sensor level scalp frequency maps of spectral power correlated with the relative inaccuracy of hand–target phase matching (the darkest voxels show the strongest effect along the respective projection; the maps are thresholded at p < 0.001, and effects significant at pFWE < 0.05 are outlined in blue; the top plots have one frequency dimension, 0–98 Hz, and one spatial dimension. P-A, Posterior-anterior; L-R. left-right. The bottom plot has two spatial dimensions. B, Renders (left) and slice overlays (right) showing the corresponding source localization of the spectral correlation to regions around the FO.
- Figure 4.
Task-dependent connectivity changes of the bilateral FO. A, Brain areas showing increased coupling with the bilateral FO during the VH task relative to the RH task (displayed at p < 0.001, uncorrected). The strongest effects were located in the right IPL (voxels significant at pFWE < 0.05 are outlined in blue). B, A corresponding null conjunction contrasts confirmed this increased task-dependent coupling with the right IPL for the left and right FO independently (each PPI contrast thresholded at p < 0.001, uncorrected).
Tables
Anatomical location Voxels MNI Peak T Peak pFWE x y z Correlation with phase-matching inaccuracy L. Insula (FO) 1 −26 20 12 5.92 0.012 L. Superior frontal gyrus (PMd) 13 −16 4 70 5.90 0.014 L. Middle frontal gyrus/frontal pole (dlPFC) 2 −26 44 24 5.80 0.018 R. Insula (FO) 3 30 22 12 5.72 0.023 Correlation with phase-matching accuracy L. Precentral and postcentral gyrus (M1) 6 −32 −18 38 6.18 0.006 3 −28 −22 66 5.78 0.019 1 −24 −24 62 5.49 0.044 L, Left; R, right.
- Table 2
Brain areas showing significant (pFWE < 0.05) coupling increases with the bilateral FO during the VH task > RH task
Anatomical location Voxels MNI Peak T Peak
pFWEx y z R. IPL/SMG 15 56 −32 38 10.71 0.002 R. Postcentral gyrus (S1) 4 54 −14 44 9.26 0.012 R. Precentral gyrus (M1) 1 4 −24 48 9.02 0.017 R. Temporal pole 2 52 20 −22 8.83 0.022 2 40 22 −24 8.68 0.027 R, right.
In this issue
