-
Physiological Reviews Jul 2020Comparative studies on brain asymmetry date back to the 19th century but then largely disappeared due to the assumption that lateralization is uniquely human. Since the... (Review)
Review
Comparative studies on brain asymmetry date back to the 19th century but then largely disappeared due to the assumption that lateralization is uniquely human. Since the reemergence of this field in the 1970s, we learned that left-right differences of brain and behavior exist throughout the animal kingdom and pay off in terms of sensory, cognitive, and motor efficiency. Ontogenetically, lateralization starts in many species with asymmetrical expression patterns of genes within the Nodal cascade that set up the scene for later complex interactions of genetic, environmental, and epigenetic factors. These take effect during different time points of ontogeny and create asymmetries of neural networks in diverse species. As a result, depending on task demands, left- or right-hemispheric loops of feedforward or feedback projections are then activated and can temporarily dominate a neural process. In addition, asymmetries of commissural transfer can shape lateralized processes in each hemisphere. It is still unclear if interhemispheric interactions depend on an inhibition/excitation dichotomy or instead adjust the contralateral temporal neural structure to delay the other hemisphere or synchronize with it during joint action. As outlined in our review, novel animal models and approaches could be established in the last decades, and they already produced a substantial increase of knowledge. Since there is practically no realm of human perception, cognition, emotion, or action that is not affected by our lateralized neural organization, insights from these comparative studies are crucial to understand the functions and pathologies of our asymmetric brain.
Topics: Animals; Biological Evolution; Brain; Functional Laterality; History, 19th Century; History, 20th Century; History, 21st Century; Humans; Research
PubMed: 32233912
DOI: 10.1152/physrev.00006.2019 -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Jun 2020Motor control is a fundamental challenge for the central nervous system. In this review, we show that unimanual movements involve bi-hemispheric activation patterns that... (Review)
Review
Motor control is a fundamental challenge for the central nervous system. In this review, we show that unimanual movements involve bi-hemispheric activation patterns that resemble the bilateral neural activation typically observed for bimanual movements. For unimanual movements, the activation patterns in the ipsilateral hemisphere arguably entail processes that serve to suppress interhemispheric cross-talk through transcallosal tracts. Improper suppression may cause involuntary muscle co-activation and as such it comes as no surprise that these processes depend on the motor task. Identifying the detailed contributions of local and global excitatory and inhibitory cortical processes to this suppression calls for integrating findings from various behavioral paradigms and imaging modalities. Doing so systematically highlights that lateralized activity in left (pre)motor cortex modulates with task complexity, independently of the type of task and the end-effector involved. Despite this lateralization, however, our review supports the idea of bi-hemispheric cortical activation being a fundamental mode of upper extremity motor control.
Topics: Functional Laterality; Humans; Motor Cortex; Movement; Psychomotor Performance; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation; Upper Extremity
PubMed: 32142801
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.03.002 -
Proceedings of the National Academy of... Apr 2023
Topics: Functional Laterality; Gestures
PubMed: 37068257
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2304170120 -
Cerebral Cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) Jul 2022Striatal loci are connected to both the ipsilateral and contralateral frontal cortex. Normative quantitation of the dissimilarity between striatal loci's hemispheric...
Striatal loci are connected to both the ipsilateral and contralateral frontal cortex. Normative quantitation of the dissimilarity between striatal loci's hemispheric connection profiles and its spatial variance across the striatum, and assessment of how interindividual differences relate to function, stands to further the understanding of the role of corticostriatal circuits in lateralized functions and the role of abnormal corticostriatal laterality in neurodevelopmental and other neuropsychiatric disorders. A resting-state functional connectivity fingerprinting approach (n = 261) identified "laterality hotspots"-loci whose profiles of connectivity with ipsilateral and contralateral frontal cortex were disproportionately dissimilar-in the right rostral ventral putamen, left rostral central caudate, and bilateral caudal ventral caudate. Findings were replicated in an independent sample and were robust to both preprocessing choices and the choice of cortical atlas used for parcellation definitions. Across subjects, greater rightward connectional laterality at the right ventral putamen hotspot and greater leftward connectional laterality at the left rostral caudate hotspot were associated with higher performance on tasks engaging lateralized functions (i.e., response inhibition and language, respectively). In sum, we find robust and reproducible evidence for striatal loci with disproportionately lateralized connectivity profiles where interindividual differences in laterality magnitude are associated with behavioral capacities on lateralized functions.
Topics: Brain Mapping; Corpus Striatum; Functional Laterality; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Neural Pathways; Putamen
PubMed: 34727171
DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhab392 -
Current Opinion in Insect Science Dec 2021Neural asymmetries of the bilateral parts of the nervous system are found throughout the animal kingdom. The relative low complexity and experimental accessibility of... (Review)
Review
Neural asymmetries of the bilateral parts of the nervous system are found throughout the animal kingdom. The relative low complexity and experimental accessibility of the insect nervous system makes it well suited for studying the functions of neural asymmetries and their underlying mechanisms. Recent findings in insects reveal hardwired asymmetries in their peripheral and central nervous systems, which affect sensory perception, motor behaviours and cognitive-related tasks. Together, these findings underscore the tendency of the nervous system to segregate between the activities of its right and left sides either transiently or as permanent lateralized specializations.
Topics: Animals; Central Nervous System; Functional Laterality; Insecta
PubMed: 34695604
DOI: 10.1016/j.cois.2021.10.002 -
Progress in Neurobiology Jan 2021Hemispheric asymmetries within the brain have been identified across taxa and have been extensively studied since the early 19th century. Here, we discuss lateralization... (Review)
Review
Hemispheric asymmetries within the brain have been identified across taxa and have been extensively studied since the early 19th century. Here, we discuss lateralization of a brain structure, the amygdala, and how this lateralization is reshaping how we understand the role of the amygdala in pain processing. The amygdala is an almond-shaped, bilateral brain structure located within the limbic system. Historically, the amygdala was known to have a role in the processing of emotions and attaching emotional valence to memories and other experiences. The amygdala has been extensively studied in fear conditioning and affect but recently has been shown to have an important role in processing noxious information and impacting pain. The amygdala is composed of multiple nuclei; of special interest is the central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA). The CeA receives direct nociceptive inputs from the parabrachial nucleus (PBN) through the spino-parabrachio-amygdaloid pathway as well as more highly processed cortical and thalamic input via the lateral and basolateral amygdala. Although the amygdala is a bilateral brain region, most data investigating the amygdala's role in pain have been generated from the right CeA, which has an overwhelmingly pro-nociceptive function across pain models. The left CeA has often been characterized to have no effect on pain modulation, a dampened pro-nociceptive function, or most recently an anti-nociceptive function. This review explores the current literature on CeA lateralization and the hemispheres' respective roles in the processing and modulation of different forms of pain.
Topics: Animals; Arthralgia; Central Amygdaloid Nucleus; Functional Laterality; Humans; Neuralgia; Nociceptive Pain; Visceral Pain
PubMed: 32730859
DOI: 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2020.101891 -
BMC Psychology Jan 2022In the general population, 10.6% of people favor their left hand over the right for motor tasks. Previous research suggests higher prevalence of atypical (left-, mixed-,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In the general population, 10.6% of people favor their left hand over the right for motor tasks. Previous research suggests higher prevalence of atypical (left-, mixed-, or non-right-) handedness in (i) twins compared to singletons, and in (ii) monozygotic compared to dizygotic twins. Moreover, (iii) studies have shown a higher rate of handedness concordance in monozygotic compared to dizygotic twins, in line with genetic factors playing a role for handedness.
METHODS
By means of a systematic review, we identified 59 studies from previous literature and performed three sets of random effects meta-analyses on (i) twin-to-singleton Odds Ratios (21 studies, n = 189,422 individuals) and (ii) monozygotic-to-dizygotic twin Odds Ratios (48 studies, n = 63,295 individuals), both times for prevalence of left-, mixed-, and non-right-handedness. For monozygotic and dizygotic twin pairs we compared (iii) handedness concordance Odds Ratios (44 studies, n = 36,217 twin pairs). We also tested for potential effects of moderating variables, such as sex, age, the method used to assess handedness, and the twins' zygosity.
RESULTS
We found (i) evidence for higher prevalence of left- (Odds Ratio = 1.40, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.26, 1.57]) and non-right- (Odds Ratio = 1.36, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.22, 1.52]), but not mixed-handedness (Odds Ratio = 1.08, 95% Confidence Interval = [0.52, 2.27]) among twins compared to singletons. We further showed a decrease in Odds Ratios in more recent studies (post-1975: Odds Ratio = 1.30, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.17, 1.45]) compared to earlier studies (pre-1975: Odds Ratio = 1.90, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.59-2.27]). While there was (ii) no difference between monozygotic and dizygotic twins regarding prevalence of left- (Odds Ratio = 0.98, 95% Confidence Interval = [0.89, 1.07]), mixed- (Odds Ratio = 0.96, 95% Confidence Interval = [0.46, 1.99]), or non-right-handedness (Odds Ratio = 1.01, 95% Confidence Interval = [0.91, 1.12]), we found that (iii) handedness concordance was elevated among monozygotic compared to dizygotic twin pairs (Odds Ratio = 1.11, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.06, 1.18]). By means of moderator analyses, we did not find evidence for effects of potentially confounding variables.
CONCLUSION
We provide the largest and most comprehensive meta-analysis on handedness in twins. Although a raw, unadjusted analysis found a higher prevalence of left- and non-right-, but not mixed-handedness among twins compared to singletons, left-handedness was substantially more prevalent in earlier than in more recent studies. The single large, recent study which included birth weight, Apgar score and gestational age as covariates found no twin-singleton difference in handedness rate, but these covariates could not be included in the present meta-analysis. Together, the secular shift and the influence of covariates probably make it unsafe to conclude that twinning has a genuine relationship to handedness.
Topics: Birth Weight; Functional Laterality; Humans; Prevalence; Twins, Dizygotic; Twins, Monozygotic
PubMed: 35033205
DOI: 10.1186/s40359-021-00695-3 -
BMJ Case Reports Nov 2020
Topics: Aged; Brain; Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Female; Functional Laterality; Humans; Ischemic Stroke; Magnetic Resonance Angiography; Middle Cerebral Artery; Perceptual Disorders; Space Perception
PubMed: 33229488
DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2020-239770 -
Experimental Neurology Sep 2022Organismal bilateral symmetry is associated with near-identical halves of the central nervous system, with certain functions displaying specialization through one brain... (Review)
Review
Organismal bilateral symmetry is associated with near-identical halves of the central nervous system, with certain functions displaying specialization through one brain hemisphere. The processing of pain in the brain as well as brain plasticity in the context of painful injuries have garnered much attention in recent decades. Noninvasive brain imaging studies in pain-free human subjects have identified multiple brain regions that are linked to the sensory and affective components of pain. Longlasting adaptations in brains of chronic pain sufferers have likewise been described, suggesting a mechanism for pain chronification. Invasive molecular and biochemical studies in animal models have expanded on these findings, with added emphasis on the role of specific genes and molecules involved. To date, the extent of hemispheric asymmetry in the context of pain is not well-understood. This topical review evaluates the evidence of hemispheric specialization observed in humans and rodent models of pain and compares it to findings where such asymmetry is absent. Our review shows conflicting information regarding the existence of pain-related asymmetry, and if so, the side to which it can be localized. This could be due to the heterogeneity of pain processing pathways, heterogeneity in study parameters, as well as differences in data reporting. With the advent of progressively sophisticated non-invasive tools that can be used in human subjects, in addition to more precise methods to visualize and control specific brain regions or neuronal ensembles in animal models, we predict that the next few decades will witness a better understanding of the supraspinal control and processing of chronic pain, including the role of each of its hemispheres.
Topics: Animals; Brain; Brain Mapping; Chronic Pain; Functional Laterality; Humans; Neuronal Plasticity
PubMed: 35671801
DOI: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2022.114137 -
Brain Structure & Function Mar 2022Following a series of seminal studies in the 1980s, left or mixed hand preference is widely thought to be associated with a larger corpus callosum than right handedness,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Following a series of seminal studies in the 1980s, left or mixed hand preference is widely thought to be associated with a larger corpus callosum than right handedness, influencing the interpretation of findings and various theories related to interhemispheric processing, brain lateralisation, and hand preference. Recent reviews, however, find inconsistencies in the literature and cast doubt on the existence of such an association. The present study was conducted to clarify the relationship between hand preference and callosal morphology in a series of meta-analyses. For this purpose, articles were identified via a search in PubMed and Web Of Science databases. Studies reporting findings relating to handedness (assessed as hand preference) and corpus-callosum morphology in healthy participants were considered eligible. On the basis of a total of k = 24 identified studies and databases, random-effects meta-analyses were conducted considering four different group comparisons: (a) dominantly right- (dRH) and left-hand preference (dLH), (b) consistent right (cRH) and non-cRH preference, (c) cRH with mixed-hand preference (MH), and (d) cRH with consistent left-hand hand preference (cLH). For none of these meta-analyses did we find a significant effect of hand preference, and narrow confidence intervals suggest that the existence of population effects larger than 1% explained variance could be excluded. For example, considering the comparison of dRH and dLH (k = 14 studies; 1910 dRH and 646 dLH participants) the mean effect size was Hedge's g = 0.016 (95% confidence interval: - 0.12 to 0.15; explained variance: < 0.001%). Thus, the common practice of assuming an increase in callosal connectivity based on mixed or left hand preference is likely invalid.
Topics: Brain; Corpus Callosum; Functional Laterality; Hand; Healthy Volunteers; Humans
PubMed: 34851460
DOI: 10.1007/s00429-021-02431-4