SES AND NEUROANATOMY IN READING DISABILITY 2 Although reading disability (RD) and socioeconomic status (SES) are independently associated with variation in reading ability and brain structure/function, the joint influence of SES and RD on neuroanatomy and/or response to intervention is unknown. Sixty-five children with RD (ages 6 to 9) with diverse SES were assigned to an intensive, 6-week summer reading intervention (n = 40) or to a waiting-list control group (n = 25). Before and after, all children completed standardized reading assessments and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to measure cortical thickness. At baseline, higher SES correlated with greater vocabulary and greater cortical thickness in bilateral perisylvian and supramarginal regions-especially in left pars opercularis. Within the intervention group, lower SES was associated with both greater reading improvement and greater cortical thickening across broad, bilateral occipitotemporal and temporoparietal regions following the intervention. Additionally, treatment responders (n = 20), compared to treatment non-responders (n = 19), exhibited significantly greater cortical thickening within similar regions. The waiting control and non-responder groups exhibited developmentally-typical, non-significant cortical thinning during this time period. These findings indicate that effective summer reading intervention is coupled with cortical growth, and is especially beneficial for children with RD who come from lower-SES home environments. (Word count: 197)

The distinction between dorsal and ventral visual processing streams, first proposed by Ungerleider and Mishkin (1982) and later refined by Milner and Goodale (1995) has been elaborated substantially in recent years, spurred by two developments. The first was proposed in large part by Rizzolatti and Matelli (2003) and is a more detailed description of the multiple neural circuits connecting the frontal, temporal, and parietal cortices. Secondly, there are a number of behavioral observations that the classic “two visual systems” hypothesis is unable to accommodate without additional assumptions. The notion that the Dorsal stream is specialized for “where” or “how” actions and the Ventral stream for “What” knowledge cannot account for two prominent disorders of action, limb apraxia and optic ataxia, that represent a double dissociation in terms of the types of actions that are preserved and impaired. A growing body of evidence, instead, suggests that there are at least two distinct Dorsal routes in the human brain, referred to as the “Grasp” and “Use” systems. Both of these may be differentiated from the Ventral route in terms of neuroanatomic localization, representational specificity, and time course of information processing.

The authors sought to determine whether errors of action committed by patients with closed head injury (CHI) would conform to predictions derived from frontal lobe theories. In Study 1, 30 CHI patients and 18 normal controls performed routine activities, such as wrapping a present, under conditions of graded complexity. CHI patients committed more errors even on the simplest condition; but, except for a higher proportion of omitted actions, their error profile was very similar to that of controls. Study 2 involved a subset of patients whose performance in Study 1 was within normal limits. When these high functioning patients were asked to perform the routine tasks under still more taxing conditions, they, too, committed errors in excess of the control group. Accounts based on frontal mechanisms have a difficult time explaining the overall pattern of findings. An alternative based on limited-capacity resources is suggested.

Numerous functional neuroimaging studies suggest that widespread bilateral parietal, temporal, and frontal regions are involved in tool-related and pantomimed gesture performance, but the role of these regions in specific aspects of gestural tasks remains unclear. In the largest prospective study of apraxia-related lesions to date, we performed voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping with data from 71 left hemisphere stroke participants to assess the critical neural substrates of three types of actions: gestures produced in response to viewed tools, imitation of tool-specific gestures demonstrated by the examiner, and imitation of meaningless gestures. Thus, two of the three gesture types were tool-related, and two of the three were imitative, enabling pairwise comparisons designed to highlight commonalities and differences. Gestures were scored separately for postural (hand/arm positioning) and kinematic (amplitude/timing) accuracy. Lesioned voxels in the left posterior temporal gyrus were significantly associated with lower scores on the posture component for both of the tool-related gesture tasks. Poor performance on the kinematic component of all three gesture tasks was significantly associated with lesions in left inferior parietal and frontal regions. These data enable us to propose a componential neuroanatomic model of action that delineates the specific components required for different gestural action tasks. Thus, visual posture information and kinematic capacities are differentially critical to the three types of actions studied here: the kinematic aspect is particularly critical for imitation of meaningless movement, capacity for tool-action posture representations are particularly necessary for pantomimed gestures to the sight of tools, and both capacities inform imitation of tool-related movements. These distinctions enable us to advance traditional accounts of apraxia.

No abstract