Elsevier

NeuroImage

Volume 82, 15 November 2013, Pages 137-145
NeuroImage

Structural connectivity of visuotopic intraparietal sulcus

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.05.080Get rights and content

Highlights

  • This study combined functional mapping of visuotopic IPS regions with DTI.

  • Posterior IPS regions are more likely connect to visual regions.

  • Anterior IPS regions are more likely to connect to prefrontal regions.

  • IPS1-4 show similar connectivity to insula, thalamus, and striatum.

Abstract

The intraparietal sulcus (IPS) contains topographically organized regions, similar to retinotopic maps in visual cortex. These regions, referred to as IPS1–4, show similar functional responses to the mapping tasks used to define them, yet differing responses to tests of other posterior parietal cortex (PPC) functions such as short-term memory, eye movements and object viewing, suggesting that they may have distinct patterns of structural connectivity to other parts of the brain. The present study combined functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) mapping with diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) to describe white matter connections of visuotopic regions along the IPS, in 25 neurotypical young-adult participants. We found that posterior IPS more likely connects to retinotopically defined visual regions, and superior temporal gyrus, relative to anterior IPS. Anterior IPS regions 3 and 4 had higher connection probabilities to prefrontal regions, relative to posterior IPS. All four IPS regions showed inter-hemispheric connections to analogous regions in the opposite hemisphere, as well as consistent connections to the thalamus and regions of the striatum. Multivariate pattern classification at the group level reliably distinguished IPS regions from one another on the basis of connectivity patterns, especially for the most distal pairs of regions; occipital and prefrontal regions provided the most discriminating information. These findings advance our understanding of the structure of visuotopic IPS, with implications for functional differences between regions, and possible homologies between humans and macaques. Visuospatial functions dependent on the parietal cortex are frequently impaired in individuals with developmental disorders and those afflicted by cerebrovascular disease; the findings described here can be used as a basis for comparing connectivity differences in these populations.

Introduction

The intraparietal sulcus (IPS) contains several regions that show a topographic organization for visual–spatial information, similar to retinotopic maps in visual cortex (Silver and Kastner, 2009). While passive visual stimulation engages retinotopic responses in early visual areas (Sereno et al., 1995), responses in the IPS seem to be particularly engaged by spatial attention (Bressler and Silver, 2010, Saygin and Sereno, 2008) though see Swisher et al. (2007). Although these IPS regions respond in a similar manner to the tasks used to define them, such as visually guided saccades, or covertly attending to a rotating checkerboard wedge, the existence of multiple IPS regions suggests that they may have unique functions in other cognitive and sensory processes.

Several functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies have probed the functionality of these regions using a subject-specific region of interest approach, wherein one task is used to map IPS sub-regions, and a follow-up task probes the involvement of these regions in classic parietal cortex functions. Such studies have demonstrated, for example, that more posterior IPS sub-regions have a greater increase in activation when visual short-term memory load is increased (Sheremata et al., 2010), and show greater object-specific responses, relative to anterior regions (Konen and Kastner, 2008b); for a detailed review see Silver and Kastner (2009).

To the extent that connectivity and function are inter-related, we would therefore expect that visuotopic IPS regions would show differing patterns of connectivity to the rest of the brain. A recent diffusion tensor-imaging (DTI) investigation suggested that posterior IPS sub-regions show greater connectivity to extra-striate visual regions than anterior sub-regions, and that this structural connectivity underlies the control of visual attention (Greenberg et al., 2012). This study did not, however, describe connections outside the visual cortex, delineate anterior IPS regions 3 or 4, or describe connections favored by these anterior IPS regions.

The posterior parietal cortex (PPC) is a functionally heterogeneous region, and several studies have used connectivity information to define sub-regions within the PPC. Rushworth et al. (2006) reported that, analogous to macaque MIP, AIP and LIP, the PPC can be divided into three sub-regions, a superior region showing strong connectivity to the superior colliculus, an anterior inferior parietal lobule (IPL) region showing preferential connections to ventral premotor cortex, and a posterior IPL region showing preferential connections to parahippocampal cortex. Cytoarchitectonic studies have identified subdivisions in the anterior IPS, labelled hIP1, 2, (Choi et al., 2006) and hIP3 (Scheperjans et al., 2008a, Scheperjans et al., 2008b); hIP3 is superior, hIP2 inferior-anterior and hIP1 inferior-posterior. A recent combined functional and structural connectivity study showed that hIP1 preferentially connects to the insula, hIP2 to prefrontal cortex (along the superior longitudinal fasciculus; SLF) and hIP3 to occipital cortex (Uddin et al., 2010). Several studies have used connectivity information to divide the inferior parietal lobule (Caspers et al., 2011, Wang et al., 2012), and relate sub-divisions to known structural layout in macaque (Caspers et al., 2011). Automated clustering of PPC voxels based on structural or functional connectivity has also been used to sub-divide the PPC into functional subdivisions in a data driven manner (Anderson et al., 2010, Mars et al., 2011, Nelson et al., 2010). For example, Mars et al. (2011) identified 10 functional sub-regions in superior and inferior parietal lobule and showed that anterior SPL clusters had stronger resting-state connectivity to dorsal pre-motor regions, while posterior IPS regions showed connectivity with extrastriate visual area V5.

Despite a growing body of literature on structural and functional connectivity of the PPC, the specific structural connections made by visuotopic IPS regions, and how these connections relate to functional differences between these regions remain largely unknown. In the present study, we combined functional mapping with DTI within subjects, to investigate differences in the patterns of connections made by IPS regions 1–4. Based on previous work, we hypothesized that posterior IPS regions would show preferential connectivity to occipital regions (Greenberg et al., 2012), and anterior IPS regions would show preferential connections to prefrontal regions (Mars et al., 2011, Uddin et al., 2010). We used multivariate pattern classification to uncover which structural connections most discriminated between IPS regions, at the group-level. A qualitative analysis was used to uncover the most consistent high-probability connections between IPS1 to 4 and other brain regions, across participants. Finally, as previous work has suggested hemispheric asymmetries in both function (Sack et al., 2005, Sheremata et al., 2010) and structural connectivity (Thiebaut de Schotten et al., 2011) of the PPC, we investigated hemispheric asymmetries in structural connectivity of IPS regions.

Section snippets

Participants

Thirty-two volunteers (aged 18–29, 16 female) participated in this study. Participants were recruited primarily from the undergraduate student body at the University of Calgary. All participants were right-handed and had no history of neurological or psychiatric illness on self-report. Participants provided informed consent on a form approved by the Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board at the University of Calgary. Scans were terminated early in two participants due to technical difficulties,

Visuotopic IPS functional mapping

IPS1–4 were successfully mapped in 25 participants; an example from two participants is shown in Fig. 1. ROI masks were normalized to the MNI template in order to calculate the mean center of mass for each ROI (Table 1). The locations of these regions are consistent with previously published reports (Sheremata et al., 2010, Swisher et al., 2007, Szczepanski et al., 2010). With our protocol, we were additionally able to map out visual areas V1, V2v, V3v, V2d, V3d, V3A/B, and V7/IPS0 also shown

Discussion

The study reported here combined functional MRI mapping with diffusion tractography to describe the structural connections of visuotopic regions along the IPS. Our findings indicated that posterior IPS regions are more likely than anterior IPS to connect to striate and extrastriate visual regions. Anterior IPS shows preferential connectivity to prefrontal cortical regions, including anatomically defined precentral and caudal middle frontal gyri, as well as functionally defined FEF. We

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Christian Beaulieu for assistance with our DTI protocol, Alexandra Pilapil for assistance with data processing, and Catherine Lebel for helpful discussions. SB was supported by a Canadian National Science and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) postdoctoral fellowship, GI and AA were supported by NSERC-735872. The authors would like to acknowledge the support of iCore, the Hotchkiss Brain Institute and the Seaman Family MR Centre at the University of Calgary, WestGrid and

References (73)

  • A. Meyer-Lindenberg et al.

    Neural basis of genetically determined visuospatial construction deficit in Williams syndrome

    Neuron

    (2004)
  • S.M. Nelson et al.

    A parcellation scheme for human left lateral parietal cortex

    Neuron

    (2010)
  • R. Ptak et al.

    The attention network of the human brain: relating structural damage associated with spatial neglect to functional imaging correlates of spatial attention

    Neuropsychologia

    (2011)
  • B. Seltzer et al.

    Converging visual and somatic sensory cortical input to the intraparietal sulcus of the rhesus monkey

    Brain Res.

    (1980)
  • M.A. Silver et al.

    Topographic maps in human frontal and parietal cortex

    Trends Cogn. Sci.

    (2009)
  • O. Simon et al.

    Topographical layout of hand, eye, calculation, and language-related areas in the human parietal lobe

    Neuron

    (2002)
  • O. Simon et al.

    Automatized clustering and functional geometry of human parietofrontal networks for language, space, and number

    Neuroimage

    (2004)
  • D.C. Van Essen et al.

    Mapping visual cortex in monkeys and humans using surface-based atlases

    Vision Res.

    (2001)
  • J. Wang et al.

    Tractography-based parcellation of the human left inferior parietal lobule

    Neuroimage

    (2012)
  • J.S. Anderson et al.

    Topographic maps of multisensory attention

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.

    (2010)
  • J.C. Anderson et al.

    Pathways of attention: synaptic relationships of frontal eye field to V4, lateral intraparietal cortex, and area 46 in macaque monkey

    J. Neurosci.

    (2011)
  • M.J. Arcaro et al.

    Visuotopic organization of macaque posterior parietal cortex: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study

    J. Neurosci.

    (2011)
  • J.S. Baizer et al.

    Organization of visual inputs to the inferior temporal and posterior parietal cortex in macaques

    J. Neurosci.

    (1991)
  • P.A. Bandettini et al.

    Processing strategies for time-course data sets in functional MRI of the human brain

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (1993)
  • T.E. Behrens et al.

    Characterization and propagation of uncertainty in diffusion-weighted MR imaging

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (2003)
  • T.E.J. Behrens et al.

    Non-invasive mapping of connections between human thalamus and cortex using diffusion imaging

    Nat. Neurosci.

    (2003)
  • G.J. Blatt et al.

    Visual receptive field organization and cortico-cortical connections of the lateral intraparietal area (area LIP) in the macaque

    J. Comp. Neurol.

    (1990)
  • E. Bonda et al.

    Specific involvement of human parietal systems and the amygdala in the perception of biological motion

    J. Neurosci.

    (1996)
  • S. Bray et al.

    Reduced functional connectivity during working memory in Turner syndrome

    Cereb. Cortex

    (2011)
  • S. Bray et al.

    Intraparietal Sulcus Activity and Functional Connectivity Supporting Spatial Working Memory Manipulation

    (2013)
  • S. Caspers et al.

    The human inferior parietal lobule in stereotaxic space

    Brain Struct. Funct.

    (2008)
  • C.C. Chang et al.

    LIBSVM: a library for support vector machines

    Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology

    (2011)
  • H.J. Choi et al.

    Cytoarchitectonic identification and probabilistic mapping of two distinct areas within the anterior ventral bank of the human intraparietal sulcus

    J. Comp. Neurol.

    (2006)
  • J.R. Duhamel et al.

    The updating of the representation of visual space in parietal cortex by intended eye movements

    Science

    (1992)
  • S.A. Engel et al.

    Retinotopic organization in human visual cortex and the spatial precision of functional MRI

    Cereb. Cortex

    (1997)
  • J. Fischer et al.

    Attention gates visual coding in the human pulvinar

    Nat. Commun.

    (2012)
  • Cited by (37)

    • Paranoid and misidentification subtypes of psychosis in dementia

      2022, Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews
    • A methodological scoping review of the integration of fMRI to guide dMRI tractography. What has been done and what can be improved: A 20-year perspective

      2022, Journal of Neuroscience Methods
      Citation Excerpt :

      When performing single subject fMRI analysis, one “simply” needs to ensure proper registration between the different MRI modalities [Research question #8]. Another straightforward method applied in 36/80 (45%) of the selected studies was to perform fMRI single-subject analysis (fixed effect) for each subject in their respective MRI native space (Anderson et al., 2012; Blank et al., 2011; Bray et al., 2013; Broser et al., 2012; Conturo et al., 1999; Ethofer et al., 2013; Gomez et al., 2015; Greenberg et al., 2012; Guye et al., 2003; Hong and Jang, 2011; Kim and Kim, 2005; Kleiser et al., 2010; Lanyon et al., 2009; Lee et al., 2014, 2013, 2012; Lemaire et al., 2013; Mazerolle et al., 2010; Niu et al., 2016; Oguri et al., 2013; Pyles et al., 2013; Reid et al., 2017b, 2016; Schonberg et al., 2006; Shimono et al., 2012; Staempfli et al., 2008; Upadhyay et al., 2007a; Uzuki et al., 2009; Wahl et al., 2011; Whittingstall et al., 2014; Yang et al., 2009). Therefore, one “simply” needs to insure proper registration between the different MRI modalities.

    • Visuospatial short-term memory and dorsal visual gray matter volume

      2019, Cortex
      Citation Excerpt :

      The IPS is topographically organized into 6 distinct regions, each containing a topographic ‘map’ of the contralateral visual field (Silver & Kastner, 2009). The posterior IPS (IPS regions 0–2) makes white matter connections to early visual areas such as V1 (Bray, Arnold, Iaria, & MacQueen, 2013; Greenberg et al., 2012), and is believed to send top-down signals to influence sensory salience in the visual cortex (Lauritzen, D'Esposito, Heeger, & Silver, 2009). These brain regions (V1 and IPS0-2) are part of the dorsal visual stream, which has been suggested to be particularly vulnerable to neurodevelopmental abnormalities (Braddick, Atkinson, & Wattam-Bell, 2003).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text