No abstract

Pattern-reversal and motion-onset visual evoked potentials (VEPs) were simultaneously tested in a group of 70 healthy subjects between the ages of 6-60 years to verify suspected differences in maturation and aging dynamics of the pattern and motion processing subsystems of the visual pathway. The motion-onset VEPs displayed dramatic configuration development and shortening of latencies up to 18 years of age (correl. coeff. -0.85; p < 0.001) and systematic prolongation from about 20 years of age (correl. coeff. 0.70; p < 0.001). This confirms long-lasting maturation of the magnocellular system and/or motion processing cortex and their early age related changes. Less significant changes of pattern-reversal VEPs in the tested age range can be interpreted as a sign of early maturation of the parvocellular system and its enhanced functional endurance in the elderly.

In 80 subjects the dependence of movement-onset visual evoked potentials on some measures of stimulation was examined, and these responses were compared with pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials to verify the effectiveness of pattern movement application for visual evoked potential acquisition. Horizontally moving vertical gratings were generated on a television screen. The typical movement-onset reactions were characterized by one marked negative peak only, with a peak time between 140 and 200 ms. In all subjects the sufficient stimulus duration for acquisition of movement-onset-related visual evoked potentials was 100 ms; in some cases it was only 20 ms. Higher velocity (5.6 degree/s) produced higher amplitudes of movement-onset visual evoked potentials than did the lower velocity (2.8 degrees/s). In 80% of subjects, the more distinct reactions were found in the leads from lateral occipital areas (in 60% from the right hemisphere), with no correlation to handedness of subjects. Unlike pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials, the movement-onset responses tended to be larger to extramacular stimulation (annular target of 5 degrees-9 degrees) than to macular stimulation (circular target of 5 degrees diameter).

The manipulation of attention can produce mismatch negativity-like components that are not necessarily connected to the unintentional sensory registration of the violation of probability-based regularity. For clinical purposes, attentional bias should be quantified because it can vary substantially among subjects and can decrease the specificity of the examination. This experiment targets the role of attention in the generation of visual mismatch negativity (vMMN). The visual regularity was generated by a sequence of two radial motions while subjects focused on visual tasks in the central part of the display. Attentional load was systematically varied and had three levels, no-load, easy, and difficult. Rare, deviant, and frequent standard motions were presented with a 10/60 ratio in oddball sequences. Data from 12 subjects was recorded from 64 channels and processed. vMMN was identified within the interval of 142–198 ms. The mean amplitude was evaluated during the aforementioned interval in the parietal and fronto-central regions. A general linear model for repeated measures was applied to the mean amplitude with a three-factor design and showed a significant difference [F(1, 11) = 17.40, p = 0.002] between standard and deviant stimuli and between regions [F(1, 11) = 8.40, p = 0.01]; however, no significant effect of the task [F(2, 22) = 1.26, p = 0.30] was observed. The unintentional detection of irregularity during the processing of the visual motion was independent of the attentional load associated with handling the central visual task. The experiment did not demonstrate an effect of attentional load manipulation on mismatch negativity (MMN) induced by the motion-sequence, which supports the clinical utility of this examination. However, used stimulation paradigm should be further optimized to generate mismatch negativity that is stable enough to be usable not only for group comparisons but also for a single subject assessment.

Our findings show that the maturation of motion perception in children is inter-individually variable, which limits the diagnostic use of M-VEPs.