3A, top panel), but only speech activated surrounding temporal areas (appearing in red in Fig. 3A). Accordingly, activation in Heschl’s complex, but not in pSTS, was selectively removed in the direct contrast Speech versus

SCN (Fig. 3A, bottom panel). In comparison, the reversed speech selleck chem Cabozantinib baseline produced activation patterns that overlap Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical heavily with the speech activation pattern in extended parts of the superior temporal cortex, as shown in the extended magenta-colored areas in Figure 3B (top panel). Thus, reversed speech successfully eliminates activation in Heschl’s complex, but, at the same time, reduces activation in the pSTS in the direct contrast Speech versus Reversed (Fig. 3B, bottom panel) and sometimes eliminates it altogether (S2, S7). Figure 3 Overlay maps in posterior superior temporal cortex. Axial slices of four individual participants depicting significant Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical responses for each contrast centered on

bilateral posterior superior temporal cortex (P < 0.001, uncorrected). (A) Overlay of ... Similar maps are demonstrated in Figure 4, this time centered on the left IFG. In each of these subjects, speech, but not SCN, consistently activated the left IFG (Fig. 4A, top panel). Consequently, SCN successfully retained frontal activations in the direct contrast Speech versus SCN (Fig. 4A, bottom panel). Reversed speech, on the other hand, exhibits activation Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical patterns that overlap considerably with speech in left IFG, as denoted in yellow in this area (Fig. 4B, top panel). These overlapping patterns result in the removal of left IFG activation in the direct contrast Speech versus Reversed (Fig. 4B, bottom panel). Comparisons in bilateral aSTS exhibited similar overlap patterns as in the pSTS (not Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical shown). Hence, our findings suggest that reversed speech is suboptimal as a baseline for speech localization, possibly because language regions attempt to parse it as linguistic input. Figure 4 Overlay maps in left inferior

frontal gyrus. Axial slices of four individual participants depicting significant responses for each contrast in the left IFG (P < 0.001, uncorrected). Same conventions and Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical color schemes as in Figure 3. (A) Overlay ... To better characterize the similarities and differences in BOLD Carfilzomib responses to speech and reversed speech, we examined the time courses to each of these conditions within core speech-sensitive regions. We found that both speech and reversed speech indeed activate these regions, with some advantage for the speech condition (Fig. 5A). Importantly, this advantage was evident in all three ROIs independently of the contrast used to define the ROIs (both using the contrast of Speech vs. SCN and using the contrast Speech + Reversed vs. Rest). We also noticed a more subtle difference between the temporal profiles of these responses in LIFG: the response to reversed speech rises together with the response to speech, but decays faster.