1 CNRS UPR 640 LENA, Hôpital de la Pitié Salpétrière, 47 Bd de lHôpital, 75651 Paris cedex 13, France, 2 Institute for Brain Research, University of Bremen, P.O. Box 330440, D-28334 Bremen, Germany, 3 INSERM U280, 151 Cours Albert Thomas, 69003 Lyon, France, 4 Hanse Institute for Advanced Studies, Lehmkuhlenbusch 4, D-27753 Delmenhorst, Germany, 5 Department of Brain and Cognitive Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, NE20-443, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key Words: delayed matching-to-sample task, infero-temporal cortex, oscillations, temporal code, vision
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
A particularly convincing approach in establishing the behavioral relevance of a neural mechanism is to show that its presence is associated with the correct performance of the task, while its absence coincides with behavioral errors. For instance, the close match between mean firing rates in area MT and performance in a visual motion discrimination task (Newsome et al., 1989) shows that a rate code carries behaviorally relevant information. We adopted this approach to test whether oscillatory synchrony is likely to play a functional role in maintaining information in short-term memory. In two monkeys trained to perform a short-term memory task (Fig. 1), we test the prediction that errors are associated with reduced synchrony during memory maintenance as compared to trials in which the monkey responds correctly. Since the location of the cortical sites engaged in oscillatory synchrony in this task is not known a priori, we recorded cortical field potentials using a chronically implanted grid of epidural electrodes covering extended regions of the early ventral visual pathway. With this technique population activity can be monitored in distinct cortical regions simultaneously. It is particularly well suited to detect a collective network behavior such as oscillatory synchrony, because it provides an estimate of coordinated synaptic activity in large but localized neural populations (Hughes, 1964
; Bullock and McClune, 1989
; Barth and MacDonald, 1996
; Freeman and Barrie, 2000
; Rols et al., 2001
).
|
![]() |
Material and Methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Two male macaque monkeys (Macaca mulatta) were trained to perform a delayed matching-to-sample task (Fig. 1). The monkeys sat in a primate chair with the eyes 83 cm in front of a CRT screen (refresh rate 75.3 Hz). To begin a trial, the monkeys pressed a lever at the appearance of a bright 0.14° fixation spot on a gray background. After 8001020 ms, the sample stimulus was presented for 400 ms, followed by a delay of 800, 1000 or 1200 ms. The three delay durations were randomized to avoid the anticipatory activity that accompanies a temporally predictable sequence of events (Tallon-Baudry et al., 1999; Moody and Wise, 2000
). The test stimulus was presented for 820 ms. If it matched the sample, the monkey had to release the lever within the 820 ms of the test stimulus presentation to obtain a drop of fruit juice. In non-match trials, the monkey had to withhold the lever release until 800 ms after test offset to be rewarded. Fixation had to be maintained throughout the trial within a rectangular window of with a total width of 11.3° and total height of 11.2° of visual angle centered on the fixation spot, as measured by an infrared oculometer. If the monkey deviated from fixation or released the lever either too early or too late, the trial was automatically stopped and the inter-trial waiting period of 34 s started without reward. Only errors corresponding to misses (withholding the response in match trials) or false alarms (responding during test presentation in non-match trials) were included in the data analysis of incorrect trials. Errors corresponding to a lever release during the delay or to a loss of fixation were excluded from further analysis.
Stimuli were smooth black shapes (Fig. 1) subtending between 1.8 and 2.5°. A new pair of stimuli was computed at each trial by randomly selecting the radial position of 12 anchoring points and using an interpolation based on Lagranges polynomial, as described earlier (Tallon-Baudry et al., 1998), with a coefficient of modulation (difference between stimuli in non-match trials) of 23.5% in monkey No. 1 and 22% in monkey No. 2. To avoid any bias due to the stimulus construction algorithm, the sample stimulus was chosen randomly as the first or the second stimulus of the pair. The remaining stimulus was used as the test stimulus in non-match trials.
Surgery
Anesthesia was induced with an injection of ketamine (10 mg/kg i.m.) and continued with 13% isoflurane in oxygen/nitrous oxide (30/70) after tracheal intubation. In a first surgery, the headpost was fixed with bone screws, bone cement and dental acrylic over frontal parts of the skull. During a second surgery, a cranial window was opened above the left prelunate gyrus, extending from 10 mm posterior to 8 mm anterior to the inter-aural line. The electrode array (see below) was inserted between dura and bone through this window. The trepanation was closed with hydroxyapatite cement and covered with dental acrylic cement. After surgery, monkeys were treated with antibiotics and allowed 6 and 2 weeks recovery after the first and second surgery, respectively. All surgical procedures were performed in accordance with the guidelines for the welfare of experimental animals issued by the federal government of Germany.
Electrode grid location was estimated from structural magnetic resonance images obtained on a 4.7 T MRI scanner (Bruker, Ettlingen, Germany). In addition, electrophysiological retinotopic mapping was performed during a simple fixation task using white flashed squares (0.7 x 0.7°) to functionally localize area V4. The combination of stereotaxic coordinates during surgery, MRIs and electrophysiological retinotopic mapping allowed us to localize the pair of electrodes of interest in the vicinity of the superior temporal sulcus, close to the inter-aural line (Fig. 2a,b). If further data improving anatomical localization become available, they will be presented at the authors website.
|
The electrode array consisted of a sheet of silicone 0.1 mm thick (Goodfellow), in which platinumiridium (90% Pt10% Ir) wires (diameter 50 µm, Teflon coated; Science Products), were inserted with a regular spacing of 3 mm. The electrode contact was an uninsulated loop (diameter 250 µm) lying parallel to the dura. The ground and reference electrodes (150 µm diameter platinumiridium wires) were inserted epidurally over the central and anterior frontal regions respectively. The signals were amplified (x40 000, 1150 Hz bandwidth) and continuously recorded at a sampling rate of 1 kHz.
To quantitatively assess the relationship between neural activity and performance, a sufficient number of error trials must be obtained, which requires a very large number of trials in animals working at a high level of performance. Because the electrode array is chronically implanted, data from several recording sessions (two in monkey No. 1, three in monkey No. 2) could be concatenated after checking the stability of both the neural responses and behavioral performance for exactly identical stimulus parameters from one day to the other. We obtained 312 and 318 incorrect trials in monkey No. 1 and monkey No. 2, respectively. To balance the number of correct and incorrect trials, we first restricted our analysis of correct trials to a selected subset of 312 (respectively 318) correct trials embedded into long periods of high performance. Practically, a criterion on performance was adjusted until the requested number of correct trials was reached (performance >90% on 30 consecutive trials in monkey No. 1, >95% on 33 consecutive trials in monkey No. 2). To further generalize our results to any subset of correct trials, synchrony was computed on 10 000 subsets of 312 or 318 correct trials randomly chosen among the 1100 correct trials available. Having thus estimated the distribution of synchrony by this randomization method, we could test whether the null hypothesis (i.e. synchrony in error trials comes from the same population) could be rejected or not at the corresponding level of significance, using Fishers one-sample randomization test (Manly, 1991
). The principle of such a randomization is to estimate the distribution of the population by selecting randomly subsets of data. If the value to be tested comes from the same population, it should appear as a typical value from the randomization distribution.
To suppress the effect of the common reference and minimize spatial smearing (Nunez et al., 1997), the second spatial derivative (Laplacian operator) was computed on the high-pass filtered data (Butterworth IIR filter, cutting frequency 6 Hz at 3 dB; forward and backward filtering to avoid phase-shifts) using third order spline functions (Perrin et al., 1987
). For each single trial, data were analyzed in the time-frequency domain by convolution with complex gaussian Morlets wavelets with a ratio f/
f of 10, with f the central frequency of the wavelet and
f its standard deviation in frequency, the frequency ranging from 8 to 100 Hz in 1 Hz steps (Tallon-Baudry and Bertrand, 1999
). The wavelet duration at 18 Hz is 2
t = 177 ms. At each time t and frequency f the result of the convolution for trial j is a complex number:
where A represents the amplitude of the signal and its phase. To identify electrode pairs showing a difference between correct and incorrect trials, we first computed a synchrony factor between electrodes k and l across n trials at each latency and frequency as:
This synchrony factor (Lachaux et al., 1999) varies between 0 (independent signals) and 1 (constant phase-lag between the two signals across trials). To further characterize the phase-lag distribution, we computed for each single trial j a mean between-electrode synchrony vector sj across time t (between 400 and 0 ms prior test onset):
The circular distributions of the mean synchrony in correct and incorrect trials were compared using the Watson U2-test for circular data (Zar, 1999). Similarly, a mean power value in the same 400 ms time-window was computed for each single trial and distributions of power for correct and incorrect trials were compared using the MannWhitney U-test.
Because we performed multiple statistical tests, the threshold for significance has to be corrected. However, these multiple tests are not independent: synchrony between electrodes A and B is not independent from synchrony between A and C, both having the signal from A in common. The classical Bonferroni correction (dividing the significance level by the number of tests performed) would therefore be inappropriate in our case, since it leads to incorrect acceptance of the null hypothesis when applied on correlated measures (Wright, 1992; Shaffer, 1995
). Elegant solutions for estimating the number of independent samples have been described for imaging data (Worsley et al., 1992
), but cannot be readily applied to synchrony measures. We used the number of electrodes as an estimate of the number of independent variables, and thus a priori corrected all P values (Watson U2-test, MannWhitney U-test) by the number of electrodes (27 in monkey No. 1 and 36 in monkey No. 2). An adjusted P-value of 0.03 corresponds to an uncorrected
level of
0.001 (0.03/27= 0.00111 in monkey No. 1; 0.03/36 = 0.00084 in monkey No. 2).
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
As a first approach to test this prediction we compared the strength of synchrony in error trials to the strength of synchrony in an equal number of correct trials chosen among streams of high performance. The difference in phase synchrony between correct and incorrect trials during the last 400 ms of the delay was computed for all possible electrode pairs and all frequency bands (Fig. 2c). For all but one electrode pair, this difference is scattered around zero. In both animals one electrode pair stands out from the others, showing a larger phase synchrony in correct than incorrect trials during memory maintenance. This effect occurred in the beta range (1520 Hz) in both monkeys during the end of the delay, peaking at 18 Hz in monkey No. 1 and 16 Hz in monkey No. 2 (Fig. 2d). The electrode pair showing more synchrony in correct trials was located close to the superior temporal sulcus (STS) in both animals (Fig. 2a,b) and were separated by 4.2 mm in monkey No. 1 and by 6.7 mm in monkey No. 2.
For that electrode pair, the mean synchrony factor in the beta band during the last 400 ms of the delay was significantly larger in correct than incorrect trials in both monkeys (Watson U2-test for circular data, adjusted P < 0.03), reflecting the fact that in incorrect trials the precise temporal relationship of neural activity between the two recording sites was strongly reduced. In correct trials, the temporal lag between the signals of the two electrodes was 8 ms in monkey No. 1 and 23 ms in monkey No. 2. In monkey No. 2, two additional recording sessions providing 298 error trials confirmed this result: beta synchrony was increased in the delay period of correct trials and was markedly reduced in error trials during the last 400 ms of the delay (peak at 19 Hz, synchrony factor in correct trials: 0.184; in incorrect trials: 0.031; difference significant with an adjusted P < 0.02, Watson U2-test, temporal lag between the signals of the two electrodes in correct trials: 20 ms).
The difference in synchrony between correct and incorrect trials was highly specific to the electrode pair considered. We systematically tested the significance of the difference in synchrony for all possible electrode pairs in the beta range. Although some electrode pairs could show a certain amount of synchrony, synchrony did not differ statistically between correct and incorrect trials for any pair other than the pair of interest (adjusted P > 0.1).
The significant difference in beta synchrony between correct and incorrect trials was only observed during memory maintenance in both monkeys. Figure 3a shows the amount of synchrony at the beginning of the trial, when the monkey was fixating a blank screen and waiting for the first stimulus, and at the end of the delay when the monkey was fixating the same blank screen and waiting for the second stimulus, but in addition maintained information in short-term memory. At the beginning of the trial, synchrony was weak and did not show any significant difference between correct and incorrect trials (adjusted P > 0.4, Watson U2-test). During the delay, synchrony increased in correct trials with a similar time-course at all delay durations, but failed either to develop or to be maintained in incorrect trials (adjusted P < 0.03). Thus, the error-related differences in synchrony could be observed best during the last 400 ms of the delay for all trial lengths (Fig. 3a).
|
No other component of the electrophysiological response we studied (power and between-electrode synchrony in the 8100 Hz range, evoked potentials) showed any reliable differences between correct and incorrect trials during the delay at any recording site. No difference of power in any frequency band was consistently observed in both monkeys. In particular, the reduced synchrony in incorrect trials we describe was not due to a smaller amplitude of the local neural activity in the beta range (Fig. 4). Indeed, there was no statistically significant difference in beta power at any electrode between correct and incorrect trials during the last 400 ms of the delay. Only a non-significant trend (MannWhitney U-test, adjusted P = 0.09) for higher power in correct trials could be observed at the far apart electrode A5 in monkey No. 2. In monkey No. 1 only, within the same regions as those engaged in beta synchrony, oscillatory synchrony in the alpha range (centered on 10 Hz) was larger in correct than in incorrect trials (Fig. 2d). This difference was significant throughout the entire trial, (Watson U2-test, adjusted P < 0.03), beginning even before sample onset. No such effect in the alpha range could be observed in monkey No. 2.
|
|
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
The difference in beta synchrony between correct and incorrect trials was found between two sites located in posterior IT. Although more anterior areas were most often investigated in short-term memory tasks (Fuster and Jervey, 1981; Chelazzi et al., 1993
; Miller et al., 1993
), this region is also known to contain neurons showing enhanced firing during the delay (Fuster and Jervey, 1982
). However, variations of synchrony can occur without changes in firing rates, as described for the monkey primary auditory cortex (deCharms and Merzenich, 1996
). In any case, the temporal correlation we observe in posterior IT is likely to enhance the impact of the synchronous discharges from this region on subsequent stages of processing (Niebur et al., 1993
; Engel and Singer, 2001
) and hence to contribute to the pronounced delay activity observed in more anterior parts of IT.
Behavioral errors may in principle be related to failures of various cognitive processes, i.e. impaired stimulus encoding, ineffective preparatory processes, deficient memory maintenance, or a combination of any of these factors. The neural processes underlying each of these cognitive processes differ in their time-course: signs of impaired encoding should appear during stimulus presentation, signs of reduced vigilance throughout the whole trial and those indicating a deficient memory maintenance during the delay period.
No evidence was found for an impaired stimulus encoding in incorrect trials due to attentional deficits: there was no difference between correct and incorrect trials during sample presentation over sensory area V4, neither in the evoked potentials nor in the induced gamma oscillations, while in area V4 attentive versus unattentive stimulus processing is known to produce modulations of discharge rates (Desimone and Duncan, 1995; Maunsell, 1995
), of visual evoked potentials (Mehta et al., 2000
) and of gamma oscillations (Fries et al., 2001
). Furthermore, we did not observe error related differences in synchrony between correct and incorrect trials for any pair of electrodes during stimulus presentation, whereas ineffective stimulus encoding has been associated with a reduced 40 Hz synchrony between medial temporal lobe structures in humans (Fell et al., 2001
).
Similarly, there was no consistent relationship between an ineffective preparatory process or a decreased vigilance and behavioral errors. Such a non-specific deficit is likely to affect the whole trial. The only component with an appropriate time-course was a reduced synchrony in the alpha range in error trials in monkey No. 1 that started already before stimulus onset and remained present throughout the whole trial. This may suggest that in this monkey a reduced level of vigilance could have accompanied errors. However, no evidence for a reduced synchrony in the alpha range could be observed in monkey No. 2 (Fig. 2c,d).
In conclusion behavioral errors are most likely related to a deficient memory maintenance in this task designed to strongly challenge short-term memory. Synchrony in the beta band was the only component of the neural response systematically related to error production in both animals and the decrease of synchrony in error trials was restricted to the delay period. This interpretation is in keeping with findings obtained in humans in the same delayed-matching-to-sample paradigm showing that beta oscillatory synchrony between extra-striate visual areas develops during memory maintenance, but is absent in a control task matched in expectancy and difficulty to the memory task (Tallon-Baudry et al., 1998, 1999, 2001).
Oscillatory synchrony of neural activity may be particularly relevant in the context of short-term memory tasks: it could reflect the reverberating activity underlying sustained memory-related activity as postulated by Hebb (1949) and its temporal structure could be most effective to induce synaptic plasticity (Markram et al., 1997
; Froemke and Dan, 2002
) that may in turn promote long-term memory storage. Temporal patterns have been searched for in single-unit recordings in the temporal lobe of monkeys performing short-term memory tasks but were found to be scarce or absent (Nakamura et al., 1992
; Villa and Fuster, 1992
; Miller et al., 1993
). Several reasons may account for the difference between these single-unit studies and the present findings, as follows. (i) Our recordings were done in posterior IT cortex, contrary to other studies that investigated more anterior regions. (ii) The recording level we used (cortical field potentials) is known to facilitate the detection of collective, synchronized events (Murthy and Fetz, 1996
; Gail et al., 2000
; Pesaran et al., 2002
). It is therefore often easier to observe oscillatory activity in field potentials than in single unit recordings, although the two recording levels are closely related (Singer et al., 1990
; Fries et al., 2001
). (iii) Perhaps the most relevant explanation is that in our study a new stimulus was generated at each trial, to prevent the development of neurons responding specifically to individual stimuli of a limited training set (Sakai and Miyashita, 1991
; Sigala and Logothetis, 2002
). The detailed and complete representation of the stimulus required to perform the task thus probably depends on a distributed code in a population of neurons. Such population coding is likely to rely on temporal mechanisms of coordination in a distributed neuronal assembly.
Stimulus-specific sustained firing is classically observed in IT neurons in animals well trained with a limited set of stimuli, suggesting the existence of a sparse representation of an over-learned stimulus set (Fuster, 1995). This stimulus-specificity is acquired in the course of training (Sakai and Miyashita, 1991
; Sigala and Logothetis, 2002
), probably by strengthening connections and modulating synaptic weights in the network. New stimuli, never seen before by the animal, elicit only a weak firing during the delay compared to those that have been well learned in the course of training (Miyashita, 1988
). It is possible that the oscillatory synchrony we observe here in response to new stimuli reveals synaptic reverberation in an assembly not yet stabilized by time-dependent synaptic plasticity (Markram et al., 1997
; Froemke and Dan, 2002
) in Hebbs view (Hebb, 1949
; Seung, 2000
), the very first step in memory formation.
![]() |
Notes |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Address correspondence to Catherine Tallon-Baudry, CNRS UPR640 LENA, Hôpital de la Pitié-Salpétrière, 47 Bd de lHôpital, 75651 Paris cedex 13, France. Email: catherine.tallon-baudry{at}chups.jussieu.fr.
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Bressler SL, Coppola R, Nakamura R (1993) Episodic multiregional cortical coherence at multiple frequencies during visual task performance. Nature 366:153156.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Bullock TH, McClune MC (1989) Lateral coherence of the electrocorticogram: a new measure of brain synchrony. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 73:479498.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Chelazzi L, Miller EK, Duncan J, Desimone R (1993) A neural basis for visual search in inferior temporal cortex. Nature 363:345347.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
deCharms RC, Merzenich MM (1996) Primary cortical representation of sounds by the coordination of action-potential timing. Nature 381:610613.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Desimone R, Duncan J (1995) Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annu Rev Neurosci 18:193222.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Engel AK, Singer W (2001) Temporal binding and the neural correlates of sensory awareness. Trends Cogn Sci 5:1625.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Fell J, Klaver P, Lehnertz K, Grunwald T, Schaller C, Elger CE, Fernandez G (2001) Human memory formation is accompanied by rhinal-hippocampal coupling and decoupling. Nat Neurosci 4:12591264.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Freeman WJ, Barrie JM (2000) Analysis of spatial patterns of phase in neocortical gamma EEGs in rabbit. J Neurophysiol 84:12661278.
Friedman-Hill S, Maldonado PE, Gray CM (2000) Dynamics of striate cortical activity in the alert macaque: I., Incidence and stimulus-dependence of gamma-band neuronal oscillations. Cereb Cortex 10:11051116.
Fries P, Roelfsema PR, Engel AK, König P, Singer W (1997) Synchronization of oscillatory responses in visual cortex correlates with perception in interocular rivalry. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:1269912704.
Fries P, Reynolds JH, Rorie AE, Desimone R (2001) Modulation of oscillatory neuronal synchronization by selective visual attention. Science 291:15601563.
Froemke RC, Dan Y (2002) Spike-timing-dependent synaptic modification induced by natural spike trains. Nature 416:433438.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Fuster JM (1995) Memory in the cerebral cortex. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fuster JM (1997) Network memory. Trends Neurosci 20:451459.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Fuster JM, Jervey JP (1981) Inferotemporal neurones distinguish and retain behaviorally relevant features of visual stimuli. Science 212:952955.[ISI][Medline]
Fuster JM, Jervey JP (1982) Neuronal firing in the inferotemporal cortex of the monkey in a visual memory task. J Neurosci 2:361375.[Abstract]
Gail A, Brinksmeyer HJ, Eckhorn R (2000) Contour decouples gamma activity across texture representation in monkey striate cortex. Cereb Cortex 10:840850.
Goldman-Rakic PS (1995) Cellular basis of working memory. Neuron 14:477485.[ISI][Medline]
Hebb DO (1949) The organization of behavior. New York: Wiley.
Hughes JR (1964) Responses from the visual cortex of unanesthetized monkeys. Int Rev Neurobiol 7:99152.[ISI]
Kreiter AK, Singer W (1996) Stimulus-dependent synchronization of neuronal responses in the visual cortex of the awake macaque monkey. J Neurosci 16:23812396.[Abstract]
Lachaux JP, Rodriguez E, Martinerie J, Varela FJ (1999) Measuring phase synchrony in brain signals. Hum Brain Mapp 8:194208.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Manly BFJ (1991) Randomization, bootstrap and Monte Carlo methods in biology. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall.
Markram H, Lubke J, Frotscher M, Sakmann B (1997) Regulation of synaptic efficacy by coincidence of postsynaptic APs and EPSPs. Science 275:213215.
Maunsell JHR (1995) The brains visual world: representation of visual targets in cerebral cortex. Science 270:764769.[Abstract]
Mehta AD, Ulbert I, Schroeder CE (2000) Intermodal selective attention in monkeys. II: physiological mechanisms of modulation. Cereb Cortex 10:359370.
Miller EK, Li L, Desimone R (1993) Activity of neurons in anterior inferior temporal cortex during a short-term memory task. J Neurosci 13:14601478.[Abstract]
Miyashita Y (1988) Neuronal correlate of visual associative long-term memory in the primate temporal cortex. Nature 335:817820.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Moody SL, Wise SP (2000) A model that accounts for activity prior to sensory inputs and responses during matching-to-sample tasks. J Cogn Sci 12:429448.
Murthy VN, Fetz EE (1996) Oscillatory activity in sensorimotor cortex of awake monkeys: synchronization of local filed potentials and relation to behavior. J Neurophysiol 76:39493967.
Nakamura K, Mikami A, Kubota K (1992) Oscillatory neuronal activity related to visual short-term memory in monkey temporal pole. Neuroreport 3:117120.[ISI][Medline]
Newsome WT, Britten KH, Movshon JA (1989) Neuronal correlates of a perceptual decision. Nature 341:5254.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Niebur E, Koch C, Rosin C (1993) An oscillation-based model for the neuronal basis of attention. Vision Res 33:27892802.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Nunez PL, Srinivasan R, Westdorp AF, Wijesinghe RS, Tucker DM, Silberstein RB, Cadusch PJ (1997) EEG coherency. I: statistics, reference electrode, volume conduction, Laplacians, cortical imaging, and interpretation at multiple scales. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 103:499515.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Perrin F, Bertrand O, Pernier J (1987) Scalp current density mapping: value and estimation from potential data. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 34:283288.[ISI][Medline]
Pesaran B, Pezaris JS, Sahani M, Mitra PP, Andersen RA (2002) Temporal structure in neuronal activity during working memory in macaque parietal cortex. Nat Neurosci 5:805811.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Roelfsema PR, Engel AK, König P, Singer W (1997) Visuomotor integration is associated with zero time-lag synchronization among cortical areas. Nature 385:157161.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Rols G, Tallon-Baudry C, Girard P, Bertrand O, Bullier J (2001) Cortical mapping of gamma oscillations in areas V1 and V4 of the macaque monkey. Vis Neurosci 18:527540.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Sakai K, Miyashita Y (1991) Neural organization for the long-term memory of paired associates. Nature 354:152155.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Seung HS (2000) Half a century of Hebb. Nat Neurosci 3(Suppl.):1166.[CrossRef][Medline]
Shadlen MN, Movshon JA (1999) Synchrony unbound: a critical evaluation of the temporal binding hypothesis. Neuron 24:6777.[ISI][Medline]
Shaffer JP (1995) Multiple hypothesis testing. Annu Rev Psychol 46:561584.[CrossRef][ISI]
Sigala N, Logothetis NK (2002) Visual categorization shapes feature selectivity in the primate temporal cortex. Nature 415:318320.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Singer W, Gray CM (1995) Visual feature integration and the temporal correlation hypothesis. Annu Rev Neurosci 18:555586.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Singer W, Gray C, Engel A, König P, Artola A, Brocher S (1990) Formation of cortical cell assemblies. Cold Spring Harbor Symp Quant Biol 55:939952.[Medline]
Steinmetz PN, Roy A, Fitzgerald PJ, Hsiao SS, Johnson KO, Niebur E (2000) Attention modulates synchronized neuronal firing in primate somatosensory cortex. Nature 404:187190.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Tallon-Baudry C, Bertrand O (1999) Oscillatory gamma activity in humans and its role in object representation. Trends Cogn Sci 3:151162.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Tallon-Baudry C, Bertrand O, Peronnet F, Pernier J (1998) Induced gamma-band activity during the delay of a visual short-term memory task in humans. J Neurosci 18:42444254.
Tallon-Baudry C, Kreiter A, Bertrand O (1999) Sustained and transient oscillatory responses in the gamma and beta bands in a visual short-term memory task in humans. Vis Neurosci 16:449459.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Tallon-Baudry C, Bertrand O, Fischer C (2001) Oscillatory synchrony between human extrastriate areas during visual short-term memory maintenance. J Neurosci 21:171175.
Villa AEP, Fuster JM (1992) Temporal correlates of information processing during visual short-term memory. Neuroreport 3:113116.[ISI][Medline]
von Stein A, Chiang C, König P (2000) Top-down processing mediated by interareal synchronization. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:1474814753.
Worsley KJ, Evans AC, Marrett S, Neelin P (1992) A three-dimensional statistical analysis for CBF activation studies in human brain. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 12:900918.[ISI][Medline]
Wright SP (1992) Adjusted P-values for simultaneous inference. Biometrics 48:10051013.[ISI]
Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall.