Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 20, 2026
Concurrent Recording of Co-localized Electroencephalography and Local Field Potential in Rodent
Published on: November 30, 2017
Comparing ERP concomitant with stimulus-induced and self-paced movements: intracerebral recordings at various
Objectives:
To compare the shape, amplitude, and topographical distribution over sensorimotor and centroparietal cortex of two sets of ERP concomitant with the same type of movement (MCP), either visually-triggered (VT-MCP) or self-paced (SP-MCP).
Methods:
MCP were recorded in 21 patients with intractable partial seizures, undergoing presurgical evaluation using stereotaxically implanted multilead intracerebral electrodes. Each patient was tested during a single session with three successive experimental paradigms, each comprised of thirty trials: (1) a tone announcing a visual pattern, with no instruction to move; (2) same tone, and instruction to squeeze abruptly a joystick at a visual signal; (3) instruction to perform the same movement paced at will, without any "go" signal. Averaged ERP recorded during task (1) were subtracted from those recorded during task (2) giving the VT-MCP. All records were taken from various cortical sites devoid of overt pathological activity.
Results:
MCP recorded from two main sites, perirolandic and centroparietal, were compared. Between all sites, VT-MCP and SP-MCP morphology differed only slightly. Ipsilateral and contralateral MCP were also very similar. By contrast, perirolandic MCP were mainly monophasic negative (N component 400 ms after visual stimulus), whereas centroparietal MCP tended to be biphasic, the late negativity being preceded by a positive P component, at 125 ms.
Conclusions:
MCP patterns were quasi-identical regardless of how they were elicited (visually-triggered or self-paced). On the other hand, perirolandic and centroparietal MCP had distinct shapes, suggesting that the mode of functioning of the generators at the two sites is different.
