Skip to main content
Log in

Long latency evoked potentials in a case of corpus callosum agenesia

  • Case Reports
  • Published:
The Italian Journal of Neurological Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Following monoaural stimulation, long latency auditory evoked potentials (LLAEPs) recorded from contralateral temporal areas have a shorter latency and larger amplitude than those recorded from the ipsilateral temporal areas. This observation agrees with the operational model drawn up in 1967 by Kimura, which assumes that only anatomically prevailing crossed auditory pathways are active during dichotic hearing, while direct pathways are inhibited. The inputs may then be conveyed to the contralateral cortex, from where they finally reach the ipsilateral temporal areas by means of interhemispheric commissures. It is this mechanism which may underline the right ear advantage for verbal stimuli and the left ear advantage for melodies observed when administering dichotic listening tasks. With the aim of verifying this hypothesis, we recorded temporal LLAEPs in a 21 year-old woman suffering from complex partial seizures, whose CT scan and MRI showed corpus callosum agenesia. Our data support the hypothesis that ipsilateral pathways are greatly inhibited by the contralateral pathways, and therefore auditory stimuli can be supposed to reach the contralateral auditory cortex from where they are transferred through the corpus callosum to the ipsilateral auditory cortex.

Sommario

I potenziali evocati acustici a lunga latenza (PEALL) registrati dalle regioni dello scalpo controlaterali al lato stimolato presentano minor latenza e maggiore ampiezza di quelli registrati omolateralmente, in accordo con il modello operazionale proposto nel 1967 dalla Kimura, in base al quale soltanto le vie acustiche crociate sarebbero attive durante l'ascolto dicotico, mentre le vie dirette sarebbero inibite. Lo stimolo acustico dunque raggiungerebbe la corteccia controlaterale e da qui, tramite il corpo calloso, verrebbe inviato nell'area acustica omolaterale. Ciò spiegherebbe perché l'orecchio destro fornisce migliori prestazioni nel riconoscimento di stimoli verbali e quello sinistro nel riconoscimento di sequenze musicali. Nel presente lavoro abbiamo registrato i PEALL in una giovane di 21 anni affetta da epilessia parziale complessa e agenesia del corpo calloso, al fine di verificare tale ipotesi. I nostri risultati sembrano confermare l'ipotesi della Kimura secondo la quale la via acustica ipsilaterale risulta inibita dalla via controlaterale. Lo stimolo acustico raggiungerebbe pertanto la corteccia uditiva controlaterale, donde verrebbe successivamente trasferlto tramite il corpo calloso alla corteccia uditiva ipsilaterale.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adrian H.O., Lifschitz W.M., Tavitas R.J., Galli F.P.:Activity of neural unit in medial geniculate body of the cat and the rabbit. J. Neurophysiol. 29:1046–1060, 1966.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Aiello I., Sau G.F., Sotgiu S., Manca S., Rosati G.:Long latency auditory evoked potentials: normative data. It. J. Clin. Neurophysiol. 1:15–23, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Alexander M.P., Warren R.L.:Localization of callosal auditory pathways: a CT case study. Neurology 38:802–804, 1988.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Connolly J.F.:Stability of pathway-hemisphere differences in the auditory event related potentials (ERP) for monoaural stimulation. Psychophysiology 22:87–95, 1985.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cracco R.Q., Amassian V.E., Maccabee P.J., Cracco J.B.:Comparison of human transcallosal responses evoked by magnetic coil and electrical stimulation. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 74(6):417–424, 1989.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Damasio H., Damasio A.:“Paradoxic” ear extinction in dichotic listening: possible anatomic significance. Neurology, 29:644–653, 1979.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Efron R., Bogen J.E., Yund E.W.:Perception of dichotic chords by normal and commissurotomized human subjects. Cortex 13:137–148, 1977.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Geffen G.:Phonological fusion after partial section of the corpus callosum. Neuropsychologia, 18:613–620, 1980.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Holtzman J.D., Sidtis J.J., Volpe B.T., Wilson D.H., Gazzaniga M.S.:Dissociation of spatial information for stimulus localization and the control of attention. Brain 104:861–872, 1981.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kimura D.:Some effects of temporal lobe damage on auditory perception. Can. J. Psychol. 15:157–165, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kimura D.:Functional asymmetry of the brain in dichotic listening. Cortex 3:163–168, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kooi K.A., Tipton A.C., Marshall R.E.:Polarities and field configurations of the vertex components of the human auditory evoked response: a reinterpretation. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 31:166–169, 1971.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. MacKay D.M., MacKay V.:Explicit dialogue between left and right half-systems of split brains. Nature 295:690–691, 1982.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Milner B., Taylor S., Sperry R.:Lateralized suppression of dichotically presented digits after commissural section in man. Science, 161:184–185, 1968.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mononen L.J., Seitz M.R.:An AER analysis of contralateral advantage in the transmission of auditory information. Neuropsychologia, 15:165–173, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Musiek F.E., Reeves A.G., Baran J.A.:Release for central auditory competition in the split-brain patient. Neurology, 35:983–987, 1985.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pandya D.N., Hallett M., Mukhergee S.K.:Intra- and interhemispheric connections of the neocortical auditory system in the rhesus monkey. Brain Res. 14:49–65, 1969.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pellettier J., Habib M., Brouchon M., et al.:Etude du transfert interhémisphérique dans la sclérose en plaques. Corrélations morpho-fonctionelles. Rev. Neurol. (Paris) 148: 11, 672–697, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Pickles J.O.:An introduction to the Physiology of Hearing. New York: Academic Press, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rosenzweig M.R.:Representation of the two ears at the auditory cortex. Amer. J. Physiol. 167:147–158, 1951.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sergent J.:Unified response to bilateral hemispheric stimulation by a split-brain patient. Nature 305:800–802, 1983.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sidtis J.J., Volpe B.T., Holtzman J.D., et al.:Cognitive interaction after staged callosal section: evidence for transfer of semantic activation. Science 212:344–346, 1981a.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sidtis J.J.:Dichotic listening after commissurotomy in: K. Hugdahl (Ed.). Handbook of Dichotic Listening: Theory, Methods and Research. J. Wiley & Sons Ltd, pp. 161, 1988.

  24. Sparks R., Geschwind N.:Dichotic listening in man after section of neocortical commissures. Cortex 4:3–16, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Springer S.P., Gazzaniga M.S.:Dichotic testing of partial and complete split-brain subjects. Neuropsychologia 13:341–346, 1975.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Trevarthen C.:Hemispheric Disconnection and Cerebral Functions (ed. Kinsbourne M. and Smith W.), Thomas, Springfield, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wolpaw J.R., Penry J.K.:A temporal component of the auditory evoked response. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 39:609–620, 1975.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wolpaw J.R., Penry J.K.:Hemispheric differences in the auditory evoked response. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 43:99–102, 1977.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This work was supported by a grant from the Italian Ministry of Education (ministero della Pubblica Istruzione).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aiello, I., Sotgiu, S., Sau, G.F. et al. Long latency evoked potentials in a case of corpus callosum agenesia. Ital J Neuro Sci 15, 497–505 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02334611

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02334611

Key words

Navigation