Perceptual deterioration is reflected in the neural response: fMRI study of nappers and non-nappers.
Repeated training on a perceptual task can result in performance deterioration. In the case of vision, this practice-dependent decrease, or perceptual deterioration is restored by changing the target orientation, spatial location, or by taking a daytime nap. Behavioral studies suggest the locus of these performance changes to be primary visual cortex. We used fMRI to directly probe whether perceptual deterioration and nap-dependent maintenance of performance can be detected at the level of primary visual cortex. We also asked whether these changes are due to a bottom-up, stimulus-driven response or a top-down plasticity of attentional mechanisms. Subjects were scanned while performing a texture-discrimination task. Half the subjects took a nap between sessions. We measured the relationship between changes in performance and changes in BOLD signal modulation between the two groups. Non-nappers showed performance deterioration that was significantly correlated with decreased BOLD signal modulation, exclusively in area V1 and limited to the bottom-up condition. In contrast, no change was detected in performance and BOLD response in the two conditions for nappers. These results indicate that napping prevented performance deterioration, which was reflected in the fMRI response of neurons in V1. Without a nap, perceptual deterioration was related to decreases in the stimulus-driven, bottom-up representation, rather than decreases in attentional modulation to the stimulus.
Mednick
Sara C
SC
University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA. smednick@ucsd.edu
Drummond
Sean P A
SP
Arman
A Cyrus
AC
Boynton
Geoffrey M
GM
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D001288:Attention / Q000502:physiology*; D015350:Contrast Sensitivity / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging; D012044:Regression Analysis; D012890:Sleep / Q000502:physiology*; D014793:Visual Cortex / Q000502:physiology*
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1991 Jun 1;88(11):4966-70
2052578
Neuron. 2006 Jan 19;49(2):183-9
16423693
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Dec 28;101(52):18251-6
15596726
Science. 1994 Mar 4;263(5151):1289-92
8122114
Vision Res. 1993 Feb;33(3):397-412
8447110
Cereb Cortex. 1997 Mar;7(2):181-92
9087826
Trends Cogn Sci. 2004 Oct;8(10):457-64
15450510
Nature. 1995 May 11;375(6527):121-3
7753166
Ann Neurol. 1998 Nov;44(5):828-31
9818942
Science. 1996 Oct 18;274(5286):427-30
8832893
Annu Rev Neurosci. 1999;22:241-59
10202539
J Neurosci. 2006 Jun 14;26(24):6589-602
16775147
Nat Neurosci. 2000 Nov;3(11):1153-9
11036274
Science. 1994 Jul 29;265(5172):679-82
8036518
Neurology. 1999 Jul 13;53(1):96-105
10408543
Neuron. 2004 Oct 28;44(3):535-45
15504332
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2004 Aug;14(4):513-8
15321073
Vision Res. 2006 Nov;46(23):4071-4
16979688
Learn Mem. 2003 Jul-Aug;10(4):275-84
12888546
Adv Neurol. 1998;78:11-8
9750898
Nat Neurosci. 2004 Jun;7(6):651-7
15156149
Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2006 Sep;86(2):241-7
16647282
J Neurosci. 2006 May 3;26(18):4970-82
16672673
J Neurosci. 2004 Feb 18;24(7):1617-26
14973244
Nat Neurosci. 2002 Jul;5(7):677-81
12032542
Nature. 2001 Aug 2;412(6846):549-53
11484056
Nat Neurosci. 2000 Dec;3(12):1335-9
11100156
Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):437-42
9176953
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Nov 22;102(47):17178-83
16282374
Curr Biol. 2004 Apr 6;14(7):573-8
15062097
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Mar 16;96(6):3314-9
10077681
Nat Neurosci. 2003 Feb;6(2):119-26
12555104
Nat Neurosci. 2003 Jul;6(7):697-8
12819785
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Dec 24;99(26):17137-42
12446842
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Jan 17;103(3):756-61
16407110
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Mar 8;102(10):3881-5
15731350
Nature. 1980 Sep 4;287(5777):43-4
7412873
J Neurosci. 1996 Nov 15;16(22):7376-89
8929444
Cereb Cortex. 2005 Nov;15(11):1666-75
15703253
Trends Neurosci. 2001 Nov;24(11):654-9
11672810