Structure, function and connectivity fingerprints of the frontal eye field versus the inferior frontal junction: A comprehensive comparison

Abstract

The human prefrontal cortex contains two prominent areas, the frontal eye field and the inferior frontal junction, that are crucially involved in the orchestrating functions of attention, working memory and cognitive control. Motivated by comparative evidence in non‐human primates, we review the human neuroimaging literature, suggesting that the functions of these regions can be clearly dissociated. We found remarkable differences in how these regions relate to sensory domains and visual topography, top‐down and bottom‐up spatial attention, spatial versus non‐spatial (i.e., feature‐ and object‐based) attention and working memory and, finally, the multiple‐demand system. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies using multivariate pattern analysis reveal the selectivity of the frontal eye field and inferior frontal junction to spatial and non‐spatial information, respectively. The analysis of functional and effective connectivity provides evidence of the modulation of the activity in downstream visual areas from the frontal eye field and inferior frontal junction and sheds light on their reciprocal influences. We therefore suggest that future studies should aim at disentangling more explicitly the role of these regions in the control of spatial and non‐spatial selection. We propose that the analysis of the structural and functional connectivity (i.e., the connectivity fingerprints) of the frontal eye field and inferior frontal junction may be used to further characterize their involvement in a spatial (‘where’) and a non‐spatial (‘what’) network, respectively, highlighting segregated brain networks that allow biasing visual selection and working memory performance to support goal‐driven behaviour.

Functional connectivity fingerprints of the frontal eye fields and inferior frontal junction in the dorsal vs. ventral prefrontal cortex

“…Such that it might have a role in suppressing internal or external distractors that interfere with the ongoing mental state. Noticeably, these statements align with IFJ’s role in cognitive control (Brass et al, 2005; Derrfuss et al, 2005) and selective attention (Baldauf & Desimone, 2014; Bedini & Baldauf, 2021). Also, for example, Zarjam et al (2011) could successfully classify working memory load levels based on the delta activity in the frontal EEG.…”

“…Importantly, we applied paired significance tests separately for FEF, aIFJ, and pIFJ per region. We did not average the connectivity values of aIFJ and pIFJ before statistical analyses since we suspected them of having different functional connectivity fingerprints based on previous evidence (Baker et al, 2018; Bedini & Baldauf, 2021).…”

“…Overall, the evidence from task-based studies suggests that the encoding of to-be-attended or to-be-remembered representational contents functionally segregates PFC and reveals two distinct control circuits in the dorsal and ventral PFC: FEF and IFJ. While FEF is involved in the top-down control of spatial attention and working memory, IFJ contributes to the top-down control of non-spatial (feature- and object-based) attention and working memory (for a review see: Bedini & Baldauf, 2021). Nonetheless, it is still unclear to what extent this functionally specific contrast is reflected in these regions’ underlying functional connectivity profiles.…”

Application of Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Autism in Children

“…The frontal lobe is the most developed lobe of the brain, it determines the language ability and thinking ability of a person, if the development of the frontal lobe is damaged, these functions will be affected ( 38 , 39 ). The main function of the temporal lobe is related to language comprehension, memory, and mental activity, if a person suffers from temporal lobe injury, he can’t understand the meaning of words spoken by other people and himself, and is unable to understand other people’s questions ( 40 , 41 ).…”

Evidence for lateralized functional connectivity patterns at rest related to the tendency of externalizing or internalizing anger

“…In particular, our results show that as anger externalization decreases, the connectivity between these areas increases. This could mean that attentional and goal directed processes associated with these regions could be characterized by a reciprocal interference that increases as the externalization of anger increases; for example, it has been found that FEF and inferior frontal regions are both involved in top-down attention, but the second is more context dependent (Bedini & Baldauf, 2021 ). A hypothesis could be that the processes associated with FEF and IFG could compete when associated with anger externalization.…”