Within-session reproducibility of motion-onset VEPs: effect of adaptation/habituation or fatigue on N2 peak amplitude and latency
Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem
- MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- fyziologická adaptace * MeSH
- habituace (psychofyziologie) fyziologie MeSH
- interpretace statistických dat MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- metoda nejmenších čtverců MeSH
- reakční čas MeSH
- reprodukovatelnost výsledků MeSH
- světelná stimulace MeSH
- únava patofyziologie MeSH
- vnímání pohybu fyziologie MeSH
- zrakové evokované potenciály * MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
We explored the effect of repeated visual stimulation on motion-onset visual evoked potentials (M-VEPs) during 25 min recording sessions in 10 subjects. The aim of the experiment was to determine influence of global motion adaptation (without motion-aftereffect) on intra-individual variability of M-VEPs and to suggest an optimal recording design for clinical examination. In addition to well described middle-time sensory adaptation, we also observed a long-time effect on motion specific N2 peak (155 ms). The N2 peak exhibited a strong relationship between its latency and inter-peak amplitude to the duration of recording in occipito-parietal derivations. In addition to the middle-term adaptation, N2 peak latency was prolonged by 10 ms and amplitude was attenuated by 30% with respect to the start of the experiment. An exponential model was employed to describe the dependency. The model can be used to reduce intra-individual variability during examination. Observed resemblance between the measured electrophysiological values and already published metabolic changes (glucose and oxygen utilization) during brain processing of visual information is discussed.
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Vision Res. 1995 Jan;35(2):197-205 PubMed
Physiol Res. 1999;48(4):303-8 PubMed
Doc Ophthalmol. 1992;80(1):83-9 PubMed
Doc Ophthalmol. 2007 Mar;114(2):83-105 PubMed
Neuroimage. 2002 Jun;16(2):531-7 PubMed
Vision Res. 2007 Jan;47(2):189-202 PubMed
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005 Apr;46(4):1296-302 PubMed
Vision Res. 2000;40(18):2379-85 PubMed
Doc Ophthalmol. 1998-1999;95(3-4):315-33 PubMed
Neuroimage. 2006 Dec;33(4):1036-41 PubMed
Eur J Neurosci. 2004 Jun;19(12):3359-64 PubMed
Vision Res. 1994 Jun;34(12):1541-7 PubMed
Vision Res. 2006 Feb;46(4):485-90 PubMed
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1988 Jun;85(12):4534-7 PubMed
Neuroimage. 2002 Sep;17(1):1-18 PubMed
Vision Res. 2004 Jan;44(2):119-34 PubMed
Clin Neurophysiol. 2006 Dec;117(12):2569-83 PubMed
Physiol Res. 2005;54(2):245-50 PubMed
Doc Ophthalmol. 1992;81(2):209-18 PubMed
Doc Ophthalmol. 1998-1999;97(2):121-34 PubMed
J Neurophysiol. 2002 Jul;88(1):354-69 PubMed
Vision Res. 1999 Feb;39(3):437-44 PubMed
Vision Res. 2004 Dec;44(26):2989-3000 PubMed
Brain. 1998 Feb;121 ( Pt 2):233-41 PubMed
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1991 Jul 1;88(13):5829-31 PubMed
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Jun 5;98(12):6859-64 PubMed
Vision Res. 2001 Aug;41(17):2187-94 PubMed
Motion onset VEPs can see through the blur
VEP examination with new portable device
Effect of Dioptric Blur on Pattern-Reversal and Motion-Onset VEPs as Used in Clinical Research
Difficulties of motion-onset VEP interpretation in school-age children
