Biology subjects

Bourgeois, A.

Publications and source records attributed to Bourgeois, A..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2021

Spatiotemporal dynamics of human attention revealed byintracerebral recording

Exogenous attention, the process that makes external salient stimuli pop-out of a visual scene, is essential for survival. How attention-capturing events modulate human brain processing remains unclear. Here we show how the psychological construct of exogenous attention gradually emerges over large-scale gradients in the human cortex, by analyzing activity from 1,403 intracortical contacts implanted in 28 individuals, while they performed an exogenous attention task. The timing, location and task-relevance of attentional events defined a spatiotemporal gradient of three neural clusters, which mapped onto cortical gradients and presented a hierarchy of timescales. Visual attributes modulated neural activity at one end of the gradient, while at the other end it reflected the upcoming response timing, with attentional effects occurring at the intersection of visual and response signals. These findings challenge multi-step models of attention, and suggest that frontoparietal networks, which process sequential stimuli as separate events sharing the same location, drive exogenous attention phenomena such as inhibition of return.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2020

LATER but FORTIOR: diffusion modelling of inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the slowing of response times (RTs) for stimuli repeated at previously inspected locations, as compared with novel ones. However, the exact processing stage(s) at which IOR occurs, and its nature across different response modalities, remain debated. We tested predictions on these issues originating from the FORTIOR model (fronto-parietal organization of response times in IOR; Seidel Malkinson & Bartolomeo, 2018), and from evidence accumulation models. We reanalysed RT data from a target-target IOR paradigm (Bourgeois et al.,2013a, 2013b) by using a LATER-like evidence accumulation model (Carpenter & Williams, 1995), to test the predictions of FORTIOR, and specifically whether IOR could occur at sensory/attentional stages of processing, or at stages of decision and action selection. We considered the following conditions: manual or saccadic response modality, before or after TMS perturbation over four cortical regions. Results showed that the Gaussian noise parameter best explained both manual and saccadic IOR, suggesting that in both response modalities IOR may result from slower accumulation of evidence for repeated locations. Additionally, across stimulated regions, TMS affected only manual RTs, lowering them equally in the conditions with repeated targets (Return) and non-repeated targets (Non-return). Accordingly, the modelling results show that TMS stimulation did not significantly alter the pattern between model parameters, with the Gaussian noise parameter remaining the parameter best explaining the Return - Non-return RT difference. Moreover, TMS over the right intra-parietal sulcus (IPS) perturbed IOR by shortening the Return RT. When directly testing this effect by modelling the TMS impact in the Return condition, the Bayesian information criterion of the Gaussian noise parameter was the smallest, but this effect did not reach significance. These results support the hypothesis that target-target IOR is a predominantly sensory/attentional phenomenon, and may be modulated by activity in fronto-parietal networks.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2019

Sex chromosome pairing mediated by euchromatic homology in Drosophila male meiosis

To maintain proper ploidy, haploid sex cells must undergo two subsequent meiotic divisions. During meiosis I, homologs pair and remain conjoined until segregation at anaphase. Drosophila melanogaster spermatocytes are unique in that the canonical events of meiosis I including synaptonemal complex (SC) formation, double-strand DNA breaks, and chiasmata are absent. Sex chromosomes pair at intergenic spacer sequences within the heterochromatic rDNA while euchromatin is required to pair and segregate autosomal homologies, suggesting that pairing may be limited to specific sequences. However, previous work generated from genetic segregation assays or observations of late prophase I/prometaphase I chromosome associations fail to differentiate pairing from conjunction. Here, we separately examined the capability of X euchromatin to pair and conjoin using an rDNA-deficient X and a series of Dp(1;Y) chromosomes. Genetic assays showed that duplicated X euchromatin can substitute for endogenous rDNA pairing sites. Segregation was not proportional to homology length, and pairing could be mapped to nonoverlapping sequences within a single Dp(1;Y). Using fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) to early prophase I spermatocytes, we showed that pairing occurred with high fidelity at all homologies tested. Pairing was unaffected by the presence of X rDNA, nor could it be explained by rDNA magnification. By comparing genetic and cytological data, we determined that centromere proximal pairings were best at segregation. Segregation was dependent on the conjunction protein Stromalin in Meiosis while the autosomal-specific Teflon was dispensable. Overall, our results suggest that pairing may occur at all homologies, but there may be sequence or positional requirements for conjunction. ARTICLE SUMMARYDrosophila males have evolved a unique system of chromosome segregation in meiosis that lacks recombination. Chromosomes pair at selected sequences suggesting that early steps of meiosis may also differ in this organism. Using Y chromosomes carrying portions of X material, we show that pairing between sex chromosomes can be mediated by sequences other than the previously identified rDNA pairing sites. We propose that pairing may simply be homology-based and may not differ from canonical meiosis observed in females. The main difference in males may be that conjunctive mechanisms that join homologs in the absence of crossovers.

genetics↗