Individual differences in white matter microstructure predict semantic control

Nugiel, Tehila; Alm, Kylie H.; Olson, Ingrid R.

doi:10.3758/s13415-016-0448-x

Cited by 28 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Dorsal tracts in the left hemisphere were shown to predict phonological skills (Saygin et al, 2013;Yeatman et al, 2011), while ventral tracts were broadly associated with access to meaning (Nugiel et al, 2016;Sarubbo et al, 2015) as well as with reading ability (Cummine et al, 2015;Ozernov-Palchik et al, 2019;Vandermosten et al, 2012;Yeatman et al, 2012a). However, it remains an open question whether these white matter tracts can be mapped onto specific language processes across stimulus and response modality, such as reading, listening and speaking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A general role for ventral white matter pathways in morphological processing: going beyond reading

Yablonski

Menashe

Ben-Shachar

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to recognize the structural components of words, known as morphological processing, was recently associated with the bilateral ventral white matter pathways, across different writing systems. However, it remains unclear whether these associations are specific to the context of reading. To shed light on this question, in the current study we investigated whether the ventral pathways are associated with morphological processing in an oral word production task that does not involve reading. Forty-five participants completed a morphemebased fluency task in Hebrew, as well as diffusion MRI (dMRI) scans. We used probabilistic tractography to segment the major ventral and dorsal white matter pathways, and assessed the correlations between their microstructural properties and performance on the morpheme-based fluency task. We found significant correlations between morpheme-based fluency and properties of the bilateral ventral tracts, suggesting that the involvement of these tracts in morphological processing extends beyond the reading modality. In addition, significant correlations were found in the frontal aslant tract (FAT), a dorsal tract associated with oral fluency and speech production. Together, our findings emphasize that neurocognitive associations reflect both the cognitive construct under investigation as well as the task used for its assessment. Lastly, to elucidate the biological factors underlying these correlations, we incorporated the composite hindered and restricted model of diffusion (CHARMED) framework, measured in independent scans. We found that only some of our findings could be attributed to variation in a CHARMEDbased estimate of fiber density. Further, we were able to uncover additional correlations that could not be detected using traditional dMRI indices. In sum, our results show that the involvement of the ventral tracts in morphological processing extends to the production domain, and demonstrate the added value of including sensitive structural measurements in neurocognitive investigations.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A general role for ventral white matter pathways in morphological processing: going beyond reading

Yablonski

Menashe

Ben-Shachar

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some studies of individuals with semantic dementia or aphasia have implicated the UF in semantic retrieval (Harvey et al 2013; Han et al 2013), while other studies using electrical stimulation during neurosurgery suggest that the UF plays little to no role in semantic retrieval (Duffau et al 2009) or only plays a role in retrieving proper names and unique entities (Mehta et al, 2016; Papagno et al, 2014). In a prior study, we found no relationship between microstructure of the UF and performance on a semantic retrieval task (Nugiel et al 2016). Nevertheless, there is one semantic memory task that is consistently associated with the UF: proper name retrieval (Papagno et al 2011; Nomura et al 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

Never forget a name: white matter connectivity predicts person memory

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Through learning and practice, we can acquire numerous skills, ranging from the simple (whistling) to the complex (memorizing operettas in a foreign language). It has been proposed that complex learning requires a network of brain regions that interact with one another via white matter pathways. One candidate white matter pathway, the uncinate fasciculus (UF), has exhibited mixed results for this hypothesis: some studies have shown UF involvement across a range of memory tasks, while other studies report null results. Here, we tested the hypothesis that the UF supports associative memory processes and that this tract can be parcellated into subtracts that support specific types of memory. Healthy young adults performed behavioral tasks (two face-name learning tasks, one word pair memory task) and underwent a diffusion-weighted imaging scan. Our results revealed that variation in UF microstructure was significantly associated with individual differences in performance on both face-name tasks, as well as the word association memory task. A UF sub-tract, functionally defined by its connectivity between face-selective regions in the anterior temporal lobe and orbitofrontal cortex, selectively predicted face-name learning. In contrast, connectivity between the fusiform face patch and both anterior face patches had no predictive validity. These findings suggest that there is a robust and replicable relationship between the UF and associative learning and memory. Moreover, this large white matter pathway can be subdivided to reveal discrete functional profiles.

show abstract

“…That would explain the current finding that structural integrity of the IFOF, and not the NAcc-VTA pathway, was associated with memory for highvalue words in older adults. Consistent with this suggestion, recent work has proposed that the IFOF is the primary tract responsible for processing of semantic information, with the UF typically playing a more supplementary role (Duffau et al, 2013;Nugiel et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…This semantic network appears to be largely left-lateralized (de Zubicaray et al, 2011;see Patterson et al, 2007 for a review), particularly when supporting the encoding and retrieval of verbal stimuli (Rice et al, 2015). The IFOF has been shown in prior DTI studies to be involved in both the retrieval (de Zubicaray et al, 2011) and control of semantic information (Nugiel et al, 2016), a conclusion further supported by lesion research (Harvey and Schnur, 2015) and examinations of functional connectivity (Turken and Dronkers, 2011). Additionally, many of the brain regions showing increased activity during encoding of high-value items in the present task, relative to encoding of low-value items, are connected via the IFOF.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%