Abstract
Electroencephalography (EEG) is often employed to measure electrical activity in the living human brain. Simulation studies can help unravel how the brain electrical activity pattern generates the EEG signal, still a widely unresolved question. This article describes a method to simulate brain electrical activity by using neuronal populations of a neural mass model. Implementing these populations in a finite element model of the head offers the opportunity to investigate the influence of each group of neurons to the scalp potential. This model is based on structural magnetic resonance imaging data to specify tissue composition, and diffusion tensor imaging data to model local anisotropy. We simulated the EEG signals of five neuronal populations generating α waves in the visual cortex. Our results indicate that radially oriented sources dominate over tangential sources in the generation of the scalp signal. Investigating the influence of anisotropic conductivity, we found small differences in topography and phase and larger ones for the potential amplitude compared with an isotropic conductivity distribution. The outcome of this article is a fast method based on superposition of sources for simulating time-dependent EEG signals, which can be used for further studies of neurodegenerative diseases.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported in part by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (research training group: welisa).
References
[1] 3DSlicer, www.slicer.org.Search in Google Scholar
[2] Amari S. Dynamics of pattern formation in lateral inhibition type neural fields. Biol Cybernet 1977; 27: 77–87.10.1007/BF00337259Search in Google Scholar
[3] Bangera NB, Schomer DL, Dehghani N, et al. Experimental validation of the influence of white matter anisotropy on the intracranial EEG forward solution. J Comput Neurosci 2010; 29: 371–387.10.1007/s10827-009-0205-zSearch in Google Scholar
[4] Basser PJ, Mattiello J, LeBihan D. MR diffusion tensor spectroscopy and imaging. Biophys J 1994; 66: 259–267.10.1016/S0006-3495(94)80775-1Search in Google Scholar
[5] Bojak I, Oostendorp TF, Reidi AT, Kötter R. Connecting mean field models of neural activity to EEG and fMRI data. Brain Topogr 2010; 23: 139–149.10.1007/s10548-010-0140-3Search in Google Scholar
[6] Brunel N, Hakim V. Fast global oscillations in networks of integrate-and-fire neurons with low firing rates. Neural Comput 1999; 11: 1621–1671.10.1162/089976699300016179Search in Google Scholar
[7] Comsol Multiphysics®. Göttingen.Search in Google Scholar
[8] Ewers M, Teipel SJ, Dietrich O, et al. Multicenter assessment of reliability of cranial MRI. Neurobiol Aging 2006; 27: 1051–1059.10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2005.05.032Search in Google Scholar
[9] Ferree TC, Clay MT, Tucker DM. Spatial resolution of scalp EEG. Neurocomputing 2001; 38–40: 1209–1216.10.1016/S0925-2312(01)00568-9Search in Google Scholar
[10] Friston KJ, Ashburner JT, Kiebel SJ, Nichols TE, Penny WD. Statistical parametric mapping: the analysis of functional brain images. London, Amsterdam, Boston: Elsevier Ltd./Academic Press KG 2007.Search in Google Scholar
[11] Gering DT, Nabavi A, Kikinis R, et al. An integrated visualization system for surgical planning and guidance using image fusion and interventional imaging. Int Conf Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 1999; 2: 809–819.10.1007/10704282_88Search in Google Scholar
[12] Güllmar D, Haueisen J, Reichenbach JR. Influence of anisotropic electrical conductivity in white matter tissue on the EEG/MEG forward and inverse solution. A high-resolution whole head simulation study. NeuroImage 2010; 51: 145–163.10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.02.014Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[13] Guntekin B, Saatci E, Yener G. Decrease of evoked δ, θ and α coherences in Alzheimer patients during a visual oddball paradigm. Brain Res 2008; 1235: 109–116.10.1016/j.brainres.2008.06.028Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[14] Haueisen J, Tuch DS, Ramon C, et al. The influence of brain tissue anisotropy on human EEG and MEG. NeuroImage 2002; 15: 159–166.10.1006/nimg.2001.0962Search in Google Scholar
[15] Jansen BH, Rit VG. Electroencephalogram and visual evoked potential generation in a mathematical model of coupled cortical columns. Biol Cybernet 1995; 73: 357–366.10.1007/BF00199471Search in Google Scholar
[16] Jansen BH, Zouridakis G, Brandt ME. A neurophysiologically-based mathematical model of flash visual evoked potentials. Biol Cybernet 1993; 68: 275–283.10.1007/BF00224863Search in Google Scholar
[17] Jirsa VK, Jantzen KJ, Fuchs A, Kelso JAS. Spatiotemporal forward solution of the EEG and MEG using network modeling. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2002; 21: 493–504.10.1109/TMI.2002.1009385Search in Google Scholar
[18] Locatelli T, Cursi M, Liberati D, Franceschi M, Comi G. EEG coherence in Alzheimer’s disease. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1998; 106: 229–237.10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00129-6Search in Google Scholar
[19] Murakami S, Okada Y. Contributions of principal neocortical neurons to magnetoencephalography and electroencephalography signals. J Physiol 2006; 575(Pt.3): 925–936.10.1113/jphysiol.2006.105379Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[20] Pieper S, Halle M, Kikinis R. 3D SLICER. Proceedings of the 1st IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro 2004; 632–635.Search in Google Scholar
[21] Pieper S, Lorensen W, Schroeder W, Kikinis R. The NA-MIC kit: ITK, VTK, pipelines, grids and 3D slicer as an open platform for the medical image computing community. Biomed Imaging 2006; 698–701.Search in Google Scholar
[22] Pogarell O, Teipel SJ, Juckel G, et al. EEG coherence reflects regional corpus callosum area in Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2005; 76: 109–111.10.1136/jnnp.2004.036566Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[23] Pohl KM, Bouix S, Nakamura M, et al. A hierarchical algorithm for MR brain image parcellation. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2007; 26: 1201–1212.10.1109/TMI.2007.901433Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[24] Rullmann M, Anwander A, Dannhauer M, Warfield SK, Duffy FH, Wolters CH. EEG source analysis of epileptiform activity using a 1 mm anisotropic hexahedra finite element head model. NeuroImage 2009; 44: 399–410.10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.09.009Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[25] Sander TH, Knösche TR, Schlögl A, et al. Recent advances in modeling and analysis of bioelectric and biomagnetic sources. Biomed Tech 2010; 55: 65–76.10.1515/bmt.2010.027Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[26] Sotero RC, Trujillo-Barreto NJ, Iturria-Medina Y, Carbonell F, Jimenez JC. Realistically coupled neural mass models can generate EEG rhythms. Neural Comput 2007; 19: 478–512.10.1162/neco.2007.19.2.478Search in Google Scholar
[27] Tuch DS, Wedeen VJ, Dale AM, George JS, Belliveau JW. Conductivity tensor mapping of the human brain using diffusion tensor MRI. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001; 98: 11697–11701.10.1073/pnas.171473898Search in Google Scholar
[28] Tuch DS, Wedeen VJ, Dale AM, George JS, Belliveau JW. Conductivity mapping of biological tissue using diffusion MRI. Ann NY Acad Sci 1999; 888: 314–316.10.1111/j.1749-6632.1999.tb07965.xSearch in Google Scholar
[29] Wilson HR, Cowan JD. Excitatory and inhibitory interactions in localized populations of model neurons. Biophys J 1972; 12: 1–24.10.1016/S0006-3495(72)86068-5Search in Google Scholar
[30] Wolters CH, Anwander A, Tricoche X, Weinstein D, Koch MA, MacLeod RS. Influence of tissue conductivity anisotropy on EEG/MEG field and return current computation in a realistic head model: a simulation and visualization study using high-resolution finite element modeling. NeuroImage 2006; 30: 813–826.10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.10.014Search in Google Scholar PubMed
©2014 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin/Boston
