Functional Connectivity Difference for Navigation Ability
Greeshma Sharma1*, Ankita Gupta2, Vijander Singh3 and Sushil
1Neuro-XR Group, AI- Division, Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (CDAC)-Delhi, India
2Computer Science Department, Banasthali Vidyapith, Rajasthan, India
3Instrumentation and Control Engineering (ICE), Netaji Subhas University of Technology (NSUT), Delhi, India
4Biomedical Engineering Department, Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences (INMAS), DRDO-Delhi, India
*Corresponding Author: Greeshma Sharma, Neuro-XR Group, AI- Division, Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (CDAC)-Delhi, India.
May 12, 2023; Published: June 26, 2023
The present study examined the beta band electroencephalographic functional connectivity between various brain regions during different stages of spatial navigation: Planning of route, Navigation through a virtual maze, and Recall of travelled path, for navigators classified as good or bad. Coherence was used to compute functional connectivity. A graph theoretical analysis was used to quantify the organizational features of functional networks at each stage in order to identify key topological differences due to different stages or individual differences. The results reveal a reduction in the indices of modularity and small worldness during Navigation in comparison to the indices at Rest and the radius was significantly higher during Planning as compared to Navigation and Recall. Additionally, the highest degree and transitivity were observed for good navigators as compared to higher the global efficiency for poor navigators. Altogether, these results suggest that different stages of a spatial navigation task as well as differences in navigational abilities induce significant changes in the functional connectivity, that can be measured using coherence and graph theoretical analyses.
Keywords: Functional; Connectivity; Navigation
- Lang EW., et al. “Brain Connectivity Analysis: A Short Survey”. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience (2012): 1-21.
- Başar E., et al. “Gamma, alpha, delta, and theta oscillations govern cognitive processes”. International Journal of Psychophysiology2-3 (2001): 241-248.
- Engel AK and Singer W. “Temporal binding and the neural correlates of sensory awareness”. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 1 (2001): 16-25.
- Gevins A. “High-resolution EEG mapping of cortical activation related to working memory: effects of task difficulty, type of processing, and practice”. Cerebral Cortex4 (1997): 374-385.
- Vecchio F., et al. “Inter-hemispherical functional coupling of EEG rhythms during the perception of facial emotional expressions”. Clinical Neurophysiology2 (2013): 263-272.
- Wyczesany M., et al. “Cortical functional connectivity is associated with the valence of affective states”. Brain and Cognition 90 (2014): 109-115.
- Varela F., et al. “The brainweb: Phase synchronization and large- scale integration”. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 4 (2001): 229-239.
- Bullmore E and Sporns O. “Complex brain networks: graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems”. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 3 (2009): 186-198.
- Bendat JS and Piersol AG. “Random Data: Analysis and Measurement Procedures, 4th Edition”. John Wiley and Sons (2010): 640.
- Cantero JL., et al. “Alpha EEG coherence in different brain states: an electrophysiological index of the arousal level in human subjects”. Neuroscience Letters 3 (1999): 167-170.
- Adler G., et al. “EEG coherence in Alzheimer?s dementia”. Journal of Neural Transmission 9 (2003): 1051-1058.
- Deeny SP., et al. “Cortico-cortical Communication and Superior Performance in Skilled Marksmen: An EEG Coherence Analysis”. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 2 (2003): 188-204.
- Welch P. “The use of fast Fourier transform for the estimation of power spectra: A method based on time averaging over short, modified periodograms”. IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics2 (1967): 70-73.
- Bischof WF and Boulanger P. “Spatial Navigation in Virtual Reality Environments: An EEG Analysis”. CyberPsychology and Behavior5 (2003): 487-495.
- Duarte IC., et al. “The anterior versus posterior hippocampal oscillations debate in human spatial navigation: evidence from an electrocorticographic case study”. Brain and Behavior 9 (2016): e00507.
- Kahana MJ., et al. “Human theta oscillations exhibit task dependence during virtual maze navigation”. Nature6738 (1999): 781-784.
- White DJ., et al. “Brain Oscillatory Activity during Spatial Navigation: Theta and Gamma Activity Link Medial Temporal and Parietal Regions”. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 3 (2012): 686-697.
- Sederberg PB., et al. “Theta and Gamma Oscillations during Encoding Predict Subsequent Recall”. The Journal of Neuroscience34 (2003): 10809-10814.
- Liu J., et al. “Redesigning navigational aids using virtual global landmarks to improve spatial knowledge retrieval”. NPJ Science of Learning 1 (2022): 17.
- Huong NTM., et al. “Classification of Left/Right Hand Movement EEG Signals Using Event Related Potentials and Advanced Features” (2018): 209-215.
- Velasco-Álvarez F., et al. “Audio-cued motor imagery- based brain-computer interface: Navigation through virtual and real environments”. Neurocomputing 121 (2013): 89-98.
- Baumeister J., et al. “Influence of phosphatidylserine on cognitive performance and cortical activity after induced stress”. Nutritional Neuroscience 3 (2008): 103-110.
- Hegarty M. “Development of a self-report measure of environmental spatial ability”. Intelligence 5 (2002): 425-447.
- Delorme A and Makeig S. “EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis”. Journal of Neuroscience Methods 1 (2004): 9-21.
- Hassan M., et al. “EEGNET: An Open Source Tool for Analyzing and Visualizing M/EEG Connectome”. PLoS One9 (2015): e0138297.
- Vatansever D., et al. “Default Mode Dynamics for Global Functional Integration”. Journal of Neuroscience 46 (2015): 15254-15262.