Commentary: Injecting Instructions into Premotor Cortex

Injecting Information into the Mammalian Cortex: Progress, Challenges, and Promise

For 150 years artificial stimulation has been used to study the function of the nervous system. Such stimulation-whether electrical or optogenetic-eventually may be used in neuroprosthetic devices to replace lost sensory inputs and to otherwise introduce information into the nervous system. Efforts toward this goal can be classified broadly as either biomimetic or arbitrary. Biomimetic stimulation aims to mimic patterns of natural neural activity, so that the subject immediately experiences the artificial stimulation as if it were natural sensation. Arbitrary stimulation, in contrast, makes no attempt to mimic natural patterns of neural activity. Instead, different stimuli-at different locations and/or in different patterns-are assigned different meanings randomly. The subject's time and effort then are required to learn to interpret different stimuli, a process that engages the brain's inherent plasticity. Here we will examine progress in using artificial stimulation to inject information into the cerebral cortex and discuss the challenges for and the promise of future development.

How is electrical stimulation of the brain experienced, and how can we tell? Selected considerations on sensorimotor function and speech

Electrical stimulation of the nervous system is a powerful tool for localizing and examining the function of numerous brain regions. Delivered to certain regions of the cerebral cortex, electrical stimulation can evoke a variety of first-order effects, including observable movements or an urge to move, or somatosensory, visual, or auditory percepts. In still other regions the subject may be oblivious to the stimulation. Often overlooked, however, is whether the subject is aware of the stimulation, and if so, how the stimulation is experienced by the subject. In this review of how electrical stimulation has been used to study selected aspects of sensorimotor and language function, we raise questions that future studies might address concerning the subjects' second-order experiences of intention and agency regarding evoked movements, of the naturalness of evoked sensory percepts, and of other qualia that might be evoked in the absence of an overt first-order experience.

Balance in Blind Subjects: Cane and Fingertip Touch Induce Similar Extent and Promptness of Stance Stabilization

Subjects with low vision often use a cane when standing and walking autonomously in everyday life. One aim of this study was to assess differences in the body stabilizing effect produced by the contact of the cane with the ground or by the fingertip touch of a firm surface. Another aim was to estimate the promptness of balance stabilization (or destabilization) on adding (or withdrawing) the haptic input from cane or fingertip. Twelve blind subjects and two subjects with severe visual impairment participated in two experimental protocols while maintaining the tandem Romberg posture on a force platform. In one protocol, subjects lowered the cane to a second platform on the ground and lifted it in sequence at their own pace. In the other protocol, they touched an instrumented pad with the index finger and withdrew the finger from the pad in sequence. In both protocols, subjects were asked to exert a force not granting mechanical stabilization. Under steady-state condition, the finger touch or the contact of the cane with the ground significantly reduced (to ∼78% and ∼86%, respectively) the amplitude of medio-lateral oscillation of the centre of foot pressure (CoP). Oscillation then increased when haptic information was removed. The delay to the change in body oscillation after the haptic shift was longer for addition than withdrawal of the haptic information (∼1.4 s and ∼0.7 s, respectively; p < 0.001), but was not different between the two haptic conditions (finger and cane). Similar stabilizing effects of input from cane on the ground and from fingertip touch, and similar latencies to integrate haptic cue from both sources, suggest that the process of integration of the input for balance control is initiated by the haptic stimulus at the interface cane-hand. Use of a tool is as helpful as the fingertip input, and does not produce different stabilization. Further, the latencies to haptic cue integration (from fingertip or cane) are similar to those previously found in a group of sighted subjects, suggesting that integration delays for automatic balance stabilization are not modified by visual impairment. Haptic input from a tool is easily exploited by the neural circuits subserving automatic balance stabilization in blind people, and its use should be enforced by sensory-enhancing devices and appropriate training.

Intracortical Microstimulation Modulates Cortical Induced Responses

Recent advances in cortical prosthetics relied on intracortical microstimulation (ICMS) to activate the cortical neural network and convey information to the brain. Here we show that activity elicited by low-current ICMS modulates induced cortical responses to a sensory stimulus in the primary auditory cortex (A1). A1 processes sensory stimuli in a stereotyped manner, encompassing two types of activity: evoked activity (phase-locked to the stimulus) and induced activity (non-phase-locked to the stimulus). Time-frequency analyses of extracellular potentials recorded from all layers and the surface of the auditory cortex of anesthetized guinea pigs of both sexes showed that ICMS during the processing of a transient acoustic stimulus differentially affected the evoked and induced response. Specifically, ICMS enhanced the long-latency-induced component, mimicking physiological gain increasing top-down feedback processes. Furthermore, the phase of the local field potential at the time of stimulation was predictive of the response amplitude for acoustic stimulation, ICMS, as well as combined acoustic and electric stimulation. Together, this was interpreted as a sign that the response to electrical stimulation was integrated into the ongoing cortical processes in contrast to substituting them. Consequently, ICMS modulated the cortical response to a sensory stimulus. We propose such targeted modulation of cortical activity (as opposed to a stimulation that substitutes the ongoing processes) as an alternative approach for cortical prostheses.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Intracortical microstimulation (ICMS) is commonly used to activate a specific subset of cortical neurons, without taking into account the ongoing activity at the time of stimulation. Here, we found that a low-current ICMS pulse modulated the way the auditory cortex processed a peripheral stimulus, by supra-additively combining the response to the ICMS with the cortical processing of the peripheral stimulus. This artificial modulation mimicked natural modulations of response magnitude such as attention or expectation. In contrast to what was implied in earlier studies, this shows that the response to electrical stimulation is not substituting ongoing cortical activity but is integrated into the natural processes.