This is evident only in a few subjects in left aSTS, again, similarly to pSTS. aSTS, anterior superior temporal sulcus; ROIs, region of interests; SCN, signal correlated noise; pSTS, posterior superior temporal sulcus. Figure S2. INCB024360 clinical trial reversed speech removes activation in language regions regardless of P-value. Axial slices of four individual participants, depicting significant response for Speech versus SCN contrast Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical (left column) and Speech versus Reversed speech contrast (right columns), under different threshold levels. Notice that even for less stringent thresholds, Speech versus Reversed speech fails to detect activation in language

regions which are readily picked up by the Speech versus SCN contrast. SCN, signal correlated noise. Figure S3. Time courses of BOLD responses in three individual participants. Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical Data were collected from ROI voxels identified by Speech > SCN contrast (P < 0.001, uncorrected). Activations are normalized to the baseline of rest signal level.

Red = Speech, green = Reversed speech, blue = SCN. BOLD responses for speech and reversed speech rise similarly during initial stimulus presentation, but then decay more rapidly in the reversed condition. This effect was found mainly in the left IFG. ROI, region of interest; SCN, signal correlated noise; IFG, inferior frontal gyrus. Figure Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical S4. Group analysis results. Group activation patterns shown for Speech versus SCN (left panel) and Speech versus Reversed (right panel), displayed on the left hemisphere (n = 12, P < 0.001, uncorrected). Activations are shown in color rendered unto the SPM5 single subject brain template. Notice the absence of activation in left IFG for Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical Speech versus Reversed, demonstrating that the difference in efficiency between the baselines is evident even at the group level. SCN, signal correlated noise; IFG, inferior frontal

gyrus. Click here to view.(848K, tif) Click Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical here to view.(6.1M, tif) Click here to view.(468K, tif) Click here to view.(1.4M, tif) Download audio file.(238K, mp3) Download audio file.(237K, mp3) Download audio file.(238K, mp3)
Several cortical imaging techniques, Chlormezanone such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), positron emission tomography (PET), electroencephalography (EEG), and magnetoencephalography (MEG), have provided unequivocal evidence of the brain activity in sensorimotor integration (Shibasaki et al. 1980a,b; Kakigi et al. 1995; Mima et al. 1996, 1999b; Weiller et al. 1996; Hari and Imada 1999; Bodegard et al. 2001, 2003; Terumitsu et al. 2009). Compared with fMRI and PET, MEG has excellent temporal resolution and has been used to analyze the temporal aspect of cortical sensorimotor information processing. Cortical activation following application of several stimuli to the peripheral nerves or skin, as well as voluntary movement can be investigated using MEG.