Meta-Control in Pigeons (Columba livia) and the Role of the Commissura Anterior

Meta-control describes an interhemispheric response conflict that results from the perception of stimuli that elicit a different reaction in each hemisphere. The dominant hemisphere for the perceived stimulus class often wins this competition. There is evidence from pigeons that meta-control results from interhemispheric response conflicts that prolong reaction time when the animal is confronted with conflicting information. However, recent evidence in pigeons also makes it likely that the dominant hemisphere can slow down the subdominant hemisphere, such that meta-control could instead result from the interhemispheric speed differences. Since both explanations make different predictions for the effect of commissurotomy, we tested pigeons in a meta-control task both before and after transection of the commissura anterior. This fiber pathway is the largest pallial commissura of the avian brain. The results revealed a transient phase in which meta-control possibly resulted from interhemispheric response conflicts. In subsequent sessions and after commissurotomy, however, the results suggest interhemispheric speed differences as a basis for meta-control. Furthermore, they reveal that meta-control is modified by interhemispheric transmission via the commissura anterior, although it does not seem to depend on it.

Sensory and Motor Interhemispheric Integration after Section of Different Portions of the Anterior Corpus Callosum in Nonepileptic Patients

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated somatosensory and motor interhemispheric integration in four patients who underwent transection of different portions of the anterior corpus callosum (CC) for removal of an intraventricular cyst. The study goal was to relate their performances to the topographical organization of the CC. METHODS: Experimental tasks included bimanual coordination, tactile cross-localization, and intermanual and interfield comparisons of somesthetic information. Response accuracy and response times were measured. In addition, interhemispheric transmission times were obtained in the somesthetic modality. RESULTS: Section of the middle portion of the genu caused a deficit in motor coordination, which was absent in patients with more posteriorly located lesions, whereas section of more rostral portions of the genu seemed to interfere with motor planning. The most posterior section in our sample, including the anterior portion of the body of the corpus, abolished interhemispheric transfer of simple somesthetic information (perception of touch) but not tactile discrimination (intermanual comparisons of shapes). We speculate that more complex somesthetic information is transferred through the caudal region of the body of the CC, which was spared in all patients. Thus, it seems that section of different portions of the anterior CC (genu and anterior body) produces specific deficits in interhemispheric integration in the motor and somesthetic modalities. These deficits are consistent with the anteroposterior topography of anterior callosal fibers. CONCLUSION: The specific disconnections deficits observed in this study may provide the surgeon with information regarding the consequences of anterior callosotomy and allow for remedial measures to be implemented if required.

Attention and Interhemispheric Transfer: A Behavioral and fMRI Study

When both detections and responses to visual stimuli are performed within one and the same hemisphere, manual reaction times (RTs) are faster than when the two operations are carried out in different hemispheres. A widely accepted explanation for this difference is that it reflects the time lost in callosal transmission. Interhemispheric transfer time can be estimated by subtracting RTs for uncrossed from RTs for crossed responses (crossed – uncrossed difference, or CUD). In the present study, we wanted to ascertain the role of spatial attention in affecting the CUD and to chart the brain areas whose activity is related to these attentional effects on interhemispheric transfer. To accomplish this, we varied the proportion of crossed and uncrossed trials in different blocks. With this paradigm subjects are likely to focus attention either on the hemifield contralateral to the responding hand (blocks with 80% crossed trials) or on the ipsilateral hemifield (blocks with 80% uncrossed trials). We found an inverse correlation between the proportion of crossed trials in a block and the CUD and this effect can be attributed to spatial attention. As to the imaging results, we found that in the crossed minus uncrossed subtraction, an operation that highlights the neural processes underlying interhemispheric transfer, there was an activation of the genu of the corpus callosum as well as of a series of cortical areas. In a further commonality analysis, we assessed those areas which were activated specifically during focusing of attention onto one hemifield either contra- or ipsilateral to the responding hand. We found an activation of a number of cortical and subcortical areas, notably, parietal area BA 7 and the superior colliculi. We believe that the main thrust of the present study is to have teased apart areas important in interhemispheric transmission from those involved in spatial attention.