Laser-Evoked Potentials Are Graded and Somatotopically Organized Anteroposteriorly in the Operculoinsular Cortex of Anesthetized Monkeys
Abstract
The operculoinsular cortical region has a major role in the representation of noxious stimuli, based on functional imaging observations, clinical lesion studies, and EEG recordings of specifically pain-related laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) in humans. The source of LEPs has not been identified, and several somatic representations and cytoarchitectonic areas may be present in this complex region. To overcome the limitations of human studies, a primate model is needed in which the main LEP generator in this region can be localized and characterized using invasive methods. We obtained EEG recordings of evoked responses to noxious laser stimulation at different intensities and performed dipole source analyses in three anesthetized macaque monkeys. We show that LEPs can be recorded that 1) grade with stimulus intensity, 2) display two distinct responses corresponding to the “late” (Aδ-fiber) and the “ultralate” (C-fiber) LEPs recorded in humans, and 3) originate deep within the operculoinsular region, thus establishing a valid primate model for experimental analysis of LEPs. Further, we found that LEPs elicited from the leg, arm, and ear display a global somatotopy organized in the posteroanterior direction (leg posterior and arm and ear anterior), which contrasts starkly with the mediolateral (leg to face) gradient of the somatotopic representations in primary and secondary somatosensory cortices. These results provide evidence that the main generator of pain-related activity in operculoinsular cortex may participate in both the somatic localization and the intensity discrimination of pain sensations, and they indicate that it may be distinct from the traditional somatosensory cortices.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Prior research identified OP1 and dpINS as two regions in the operculoinsular region specifically involved in pain-related somatosensory processing.
“Prior research has identi fi ed two regions in the operculoinsular region that are speci fi cally involved in pain-related somatosensory processing: OP1, the most caudal area of the parietal operculum, and dpINS (19 -23).”
From Social rejection shares somatosensory representations with physical pain (2011) · cites this paper as [22]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 42 · Cited by 73
- Authors
- Baumgärtner, U., Tiede, W., Treede, R.-D., & Craig, A. D. (.
- Affiliations
- Barrow Neurological Institute (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Neurophysiology
- Publisher
- American Physiological Society
- Published
- 2006-11
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2802-2808
- ISSN
- 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-1598
- OpenAlex
- W2032652882
- Cited by
- 73
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 2.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS041287, NS41287)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
- Keywords
- laser-evoked potentials, pain processing, somatotopic organization, dipole source analysis, macaque, somatosensory cortex
- MeSH terms
- Anesthesia, Animals, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Lasers, Macaca fascicularis, Pain
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review