Biomedical subjects

Vincent L Gracco

Publications and source records attributed to Vincent L Gracco.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Contribution of the frontal lobe to externally and internally specified verbal responses: fMRI evidence.

It has been suggested that within the frontal cortex there is a lateral to medial shift in the control of action, with the lateral premotor area (PMA) involved in externally specified actions and the medial supplementary motor areas (SMA) involved in internally specified actions. Recent brain imaging studies demonstrate, however, that the control of externally and internally specified actions may involve more complex and overlapping networks involving not only the PMA and the SMA, but also the pre-SMA and the lateral prefrontal cortex (PFC). The aim of the present study was to determine whether these frontal regions are differentially involved in the production of verbal responses, when they are externally specified and when they are internally specified. Participants engaged in three overt speaking tasks in which the degree of response specification differed. The tasks involved reading aloud words (externally specified), or generating words aloud from narrow or broad semantic categories (internally specified). Using fMRI, the location and magnitude of the BOLD activity for these tasks was measured in a group of ten participants. Compared with rest, all tasks activated the primary motor area and the SMA-proper, reflecting their common role in speech production. The magnitude of the activity in the PFC (Brodmann area 45), the left PMAv and the pre-SMA increased for word generation, suggesting that each of these three regions plays a role in internally specified action selection. This confirms previous reports concerning the participation of the pre-SMA in verbal response selection. The pattern of activity in PMAv suggests participation in both externally and internally specified verbal actions.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Imaging speech production using fMRI.

Human speech is a well-learned, sensorimotor, and ecological behavior ideal for the study of neural processes and brain-behavior relations. With the advent of modern neuroimaging techniques such as positron emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), the potential for investigating neural mechanisms of speech motor control, speech motor disorders, and speech motor development has increased. However, a practical issue has limited the application of fMRI to issues in spoken language production and other related behaviors (singing, swallowing). Producing these behaviors during volume acquisition introduces motion-induced signal changes that confound the activation signals of interest. A number of approaches, ranging from signal processing to using silent or covert speech, have attempted to remove or prevent the effects of motion-induced artefact. However, these approaches are flawed for a variety of reasons. An alternative approach, that has only recently been applied to study single-word production, uses pauses in volume acquisition during the production of natural speech motion. Here we present some representative data illustrating the problems associated with motion artefacts and some qualitative results acquired from subjects producing short sentences and orofacial nonspeech movements in the scanner. Using pauses or silent intervals in volume acquisition and block designs, results from individual subjects result in robust activation without motion-induced signal artefact. This approach is an efficient method for studying the neural basis of spoken language production and the effects of speech and language disorders using fMRI.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Coordination of oral and laryngeal movements in the perceptually fluent speech of adults who stutter.

This work investigated whether stuttering and nonstuttering adults differ in the coordination of oral and laryngeal movements during the production of perceptually fluent speech. This question was addressed by completing correlation analyses that extended previous acoustic studies by others as well as inferential analyses based on the within-subject central tendency and variability of acoustic and physiological indices of oral-laryngeal control and coordination. Stuttering and nonstuttering adults produced the target /p/ as the medial consonant in C(1)V(1)#C(2)V(2)C(3) sequences (C = consonant; V = vowel or diphthong; # = word boundary) embedded in utterances differing in length and location of the target movements. No between-groups differences were found for across- or within-subject correlations between acoustic measures of stop gap and voice onset time (VOT). However, the acoustic data did show longer durations for devoicing interval and VOT in the stuttering versus nonstuttering individuals, in the absence of a difference for a proportional measure specifically reflecting oral-laryngeal relative timing. Analyses of combined kinematic and electroglottographic data revealed that the stuttering individuals' speech was also characterized by (a) longer durations from bilabial closing movement onset and peak velocity to V(1) vocal fold vibration offset and (b) greater within-subject variability for dependent variables that were physiological indices of devoicing interval and VOT, but again no between-groups differences were found for specific indices of oral-laryngeal relative timing. Overall, findings suggest that, for the production of voiceless bilabial stops in perceptually fluent speech, stuttering and nonstuttering adults differ in the duration of intervals defined by events within as well as across the oral and laryngeal subsystems, but the groups show similar patterns of relative timing for the involved oral and laryngeal movements.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Kinematic analyses of speech, orofacial nonspeech, and finger movements in stuttering and nonstuttering adults.

This work investigated the hypothesis that neuromotor differences between individuals who stutter and individuals who do not stutter are not limited to the movements involved in speech production. Kinematic data were obtained from gender- and age-matched stuttering (n = 10) and nonstuttering (n = 10) adults during speech movements, orofacial nonspeech movements, and finger movements. All movements were performed in 4 conditions differing in sequence length and location of the target movement within the sequence. Results revealed statistically significant differences between the stuttering and nonstuttering individuals on several measures of lip and jaw closing (but not opening) movements during perceptually fluent speech. The magnitude of these differences varied across different levels of utterance length (larger differences during shorter utterances) and across different locations of the target movement within an utterance (larger differences close to the beginning). Results further revealed statistically significant differences between the stuttering and nonstuttering groups in finger flexion (but not extension) movement duration and peak velocity latency. Overall, findings suggest that differences between stuttering and nonstuttering individuals are not confined to the sensorimotor processes underlying speech production or even movements of the orofacial system in general. Rather, it appears that the groups show generalized differences in the duration of certain goal-directed movements across unrelated motor systems.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Task-specific sensorimotor interactions in speech production.

Speaking involves the activity of multiple muscles moving many parts (articulators) of the vocal tract. In previous studies, it has been shown that mechanical perturbation delivered to one moving speech articulator, such as the lower lip or jaw, results in compensatory responses in the perturbed and other non-perturbed articulators, but not in articulators that are uninvolved in the specific speech sound being produced. These observations suggest that the speech motor control system may be organized in a task-specific manner. However, previous studies have not used the appropriate controls to address the mechanism by which this task-specific organization is achieved. A lack of response in a non-perturbed articulator may simply reflect the fact that the muscles examined were not active. Alternatively, there may be a specific gating of somatic sensory signals due to task requirements. The present study was designed to address the nature of the underlying sensorimotor organization. Unanticipated mechanical loads were applied to the upper lip during the "p" in "apa" and "f" in "afa" in six subjects. Both lips are used to produce "p", while only the lower lip is used for "f". For "apa", both upper lip and lower lip responses were observed following upper lip perturbation. For "afa", no upper lip or lower lip responses were observed following the upper lip perturbation. The differential response of the lower lip, which was phasically active during both speech tasks, indicates that the neural organization of these two speech tasks differs not only in terms of the different muscles used to produce the different movements, but also in terms of the sensorimotor interactions within and across the two lips.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2002

Control of oral closure in lingual stop consonant production.

Previous work has shown that the lips are moving at a high velocity when the oral closure occurs for bilabial stop consonants, resulting in tissue compression and mechanical interactions between the lips. The present experiment recorded tongue movements in four subjects during the production of velar and alveolar stop consonants to examine kinematic events before, during, and after the stop closure. The results show that, similar to the lips, the tongue is often moving at a high velocity at the onset of closure. The tongue movements were more complex, with both horizontal and vertical components. Movement velocity at closure and release were influenced by both the preceding and the following vowel. During the period of oral closure, the tongue moved through a trajectory of usually less than 1 cm; again, the magnitude of the movement was context dependent. Overall, the tongue moved in forward-backward curved paths. The results are compatible with the idea that the tongue is free to move during the closure as long as an airtight seal is maintained. A new interpretation of the curved movement paths of the tongue in speech is also proposed. This interpretation is based on the principle of cost minimization that has been successfully applied in the study of hand movements in reaching.

Biomechanical Phenomena↗