Our results suggest a regionally specific alteration of HF-DLPFC functional connectivity in schizophrenia that manifests as an unmodulated persistence of an HF-DLPFC linkage during working memory activation. Thus, a mechanism by which HF dysfunction may manifest in schizophrenia is by inappropriate reciprocal modulatory interaction with the DLPFC.

A unique opportunity to understand genetic determinants of cognition is offered by Williams syndrome (WS), a well-characterized hemideletion on chromosome 7q11.23 that causes extreme, specific weakness in visuospatial construction (the ability to visualize an object as a set of parts or construct a replica). Using multimodal neuroimaging, we identified a neural mechanism underlying the WS visuoconstructive deficit. Hierarchical assessment of visual processing with fMRI showed isolated hypoactivation in WS in the parietal portion of the dorsal stream. In the immediately adjacent parietooccipital/intraparietal sulcus, structural neuroimaging showed a gray matter volume reduction in participants with WS. Path analysis demonstrated that the functional abnormalities could be attributed to impaired input from this structurally altered region. Our observations confirm a longstanding hypothesis about dorsal stream dysfunction in WS, demonstrate effects of a localized abnormality on visual information processing in humans, and define a systems-level phenotype for mapping genetic determinants of visuoconstructive function.

OBJECTIVE An increasing number of human in vivo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have focused on examining the structure and function of the subfields of the hippocampal formation (the dentate gyrus, CA fields 1–3, and the subiculum) and subregions of the parahippocampal gyrus (entorhinal, perirhinal, and parahippocampal cortices). The ability to interpret the results of such studies and to relate them to each other would be improved if a common standard existed for labeling hippocampal subfields and parahippocampal subregions. Currently, research groups label different subsets of structures and use different rules, landmarks, and cues to define their anatomical extents. This paper characterizes, both qualitatively and quantitatively, the variability in the existing manual segmentation protocols for labeling hippocampal and parahippocampal substructures in MRI, with the goal of guiding subsequent work on developing a harmonized substructure segmentation protocol. METHOD MRI scans of a single healthy adult human subject were acquired both at 3 Tesla and 7 Tesla. Representatives from 21 research groups applied their respective manual segmentation protocols to the MRI modalities of their choice. The resulting set of 21 segmentations was analyzed in a common anatomical space to quantify similarity and identify areas of agreement. RESULTS The differences between the 21 protocols include the region within which segmentation is performed, the set of anatomical labels used, and the extents of specific anatomical labels. The greatest overall disagreement among the protocols is at the CA1/subiculum boundary, and disagreement across all structures is greatest in the anterior portion of the hippocampal formation relative to the body and tail. CONCLUSIONS The combined examination of the 21 protocols in the same dataset suggests possible strategies towards developing a harmonized subfield segmentation protocol and facilitates comparison between published studies.

It has been well established that the hippocampus plays a pivotal role in explicit long-term recognition memory. However, findings from amnesia, lesion and recording studies with non-human animals, eye-movement recording studies, and functional neuroimaging have recently converged upon a similar message: the functional reach of the hippocampus extends far beyond explicit recognition memory. Damage to the hippocampus affects performance on a number of cognitive tasks including recognition memory after short and long delays and visual discrimination. Additionally, with the advent of neuroimaging techniques that have fine spatial and temporal resolution, findings have emerged that show the elicitation of hippocampal responses within the first few 100 ms of stimulus/task onset. These responses occur for novel and previously viewed information during a time when perceptual processing is traditionally thought to occur, and long before overt recognition responses are made. We propose that the hippocampus is obligatorily involved in the binding of disparate elements across both space and time, and in the comparison of such relational memory representations. Furthermore, the hippocampus supports relational binding and comparison with or without conscious awareness for the relational representations that are formed, retrieved and/or compared. It is by virtue of these basic binding and comparison functions that the reach of the hippocampus extends beyond long-term recognition memory and underlies task performance in multiple cognitive domains.

To hear a sequence of words and repeat them requires sensory-motor processing and something more-temporary storage. We investigated neural mechanisms of verbal memory by using fMRI and a task designed to tease apart perceptually based ("echoic") memory from phonological-articulatory memory. Sets of two- or three-word pairs were presented bimodally, followed by a cue indicating from which modality (auditory or visual) items were to be retrieved and rehearsed over a delay. Although delay-period activation in the planum temporale (PT) was insensible to the source modality and showed sustained delay-period activity, the superior temporal gyrus (STG) activated more vigorously when the retrieved items had arrived to the auditory modality and showed transient delay-period activity. Functional connectivity analysis revealed two topographically distinct fronto-temporal circuits, with STG co-activating more strongly with ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and PT co-activating more strongly with dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. These argue for separate contributions of ventral and dorsal auditory streams in verbal working memory.

No abstract

The advent of high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has enabled in vivo research in a variety of populations and diseases on the structure and function of hippocampal subfields and subdivisions of the parahippocampal gyrus. Due to the many extant and highly discrepant segmentation protocols, comparing results across studies is difficult. To overcome this barrier, the Hippocampal Subfields Group was formed as an international collaboration with the aim of developing a harmonized protocol for manual segmentation of hippocampal and parahippocampal subregions on high-resolution MRI. In this commentary we discuss the goals for this protocol and the associated key challenges involved in its development. These include differences among existing anatomical reference materials, striking the right balance between reliability of measurements and anatomical validity, and the development of a versatile protocol that can be adopted for the study of populations varying in age and health. The commentary outlines these key challenges, as well as the proposed solution of each, with concrete examples from our working plan. Finally, with two examples, we illustrate how the harmonized protocol, once completed, is expected to impact the field by producing measurements that are quantitatively comparable across labs and by facilitating the synthesis of findings across different studies.

Hippocampal subfields CA3 and CA1 are hypothesized to differentially support the generation of associative predictions and the detection of associative mismatches, respectively. Using high-resolution functional MRI, we examined hippocampal subfield activation during associative retrieval and during subsequent comparisons of memory to matching or mismatching decision probes. Activity in the dentate gyrus/CA2/3, CA1, and other medial temporal lobe subregions tracked associative retrieval success, whereas activity in CA1 and the perirhinal cortex tracked the presence of associative mismatches. These data support the hypothesis that CA1 acts as a “comparator,” detecting when memory for the past and sensory input in the present diverge.