Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Oscillatory dynamics coordinating human frontal networks in support of goal maintenance

Nature Neuroscience volume 18, pages 1318–1324 (2015)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Humans have a capacity for hierarchical cognitive control—the ability to simultaneously control immediate actions while holding more abstract goals in mind. Neuropsychological and neuroimaging evidence suggests that hierarchical cognitive control emerges from a frontal architecture whereby prefrontal cortex coordinates neural activity in the motor cortices when abstract rules are needed to govern motor outcomes. We utilized the improved temporal resolution of human intracranial electrocorticography to investigate the mechanisms by which frontal cortical oscillatory networks communicate in support of hierarchical cognitive control. Responding according to progressively more abstract rules resulted in greater frontal network theta phase encoding (4–8 Hz) and increased prefrontal local neuronal population activity (high gamma amplitude, 80–150 Hz), which predicts trial-by-trial response times. Theta phase encoding coupled with high gamma amplitude during inter-regional information encoding, suggesting that inter-regional phase encoding is a mechanism for the dynamic instantiation of complex cognitive functions by frontal cortical subnetworks.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Task, subjects and behavior.
Figure 2: High gamma amplitude differentiates frontal responses.
Figure 3: Frontal phase and amplitude communication model.
Figure 4: Task- and region-dependent frontal theta phase encoding.
Figure 5: Encoding-triggered PAC.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Miller, G.A., Galanter, E. & Pribram, K. Plans and the Structure of Human Behavior (New York: Holt, 1960).

  2. Koechlin, E., Ody, C. & Kouneiher, F. The architecture of cognitive control in the human prefrontal cortex. Science 302, 1181–1185 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Badre, D. & D'Esposito, M. Functional magnetic resonance imaging evidence for a hierarchical organization of the prefrontal cortex. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 19, 2082–2099 (2007).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Badre, D. Cognitive control, hierarchy, and the rostro-caudal organization of the frontal lobes. Trends Cogn. Sci. 12, 193–200 (2008).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Christoff, K., Keramatian, K., Gordon, A.M., Smith, R. & Mädler, B. Prefrontal organization of cognitive control according to levels of abstraction. Brain Res. 1286, 94–105 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Miller, E.K. & Cohen, J.D. An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 24, 167–202 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Schwartz, M.F. Re-examining the role of executive functions in routine action production. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 769, 321–335 (1995).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cooper, R.P. & Shallice, T. Hierarchical schemas and goals in the control of sequential behavior. Psychol. Rev. 113, 887–916 (2006).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Badre, D., Hoffman, J., Cooney, J.W. & D'Esposito, M. Hierarchical cognitive control deficits following damage to the human frontal lobe. Nat. Neurosci. 12, 515–522 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Badre, D. & D'Esposito, M. Is the rostro-caudal axis of the frontal lobe hierarchical? Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 10, 659–669 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Frank, M.J. & Badre, D. Mechanisms of hierarchical reinforcement learning in corticostriatal circuits 1: computational analysis. Cereb. Cortex 22, 509–526 (2012).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Badre, D. & Frank, M.J. Mechanisms of hierarchical reinforcement learning in cortico-striatal circuits 2: evidence from fMRI. Cereb. Cortex 22, 527–536 (2012).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kayser, A.S. & D'Esposito, M. Abstract rule learning: the differential effects of lesions in frontal cortex. Cereb. Cortex 23, 230–240 (2013).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Voytek, B. et al. Dynamic neuroplasticity after human prefrontal cortex damage. Neuron 68, 401–408 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Voytek, B. & Knight, R.T. Prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia contributions to visual working memory. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107, 18167–18172 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Voytek, B. et al. Shifts in gamma phase-amplitude coupling frequency from theta to alpha over posterior cortex during visual tasks. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 4, 191 (2010).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Szczepanski, S.M. & Knight, R.T. Insights into human behavior from lesions to the prefrontal cortex. Neuron 83, 1002–1018 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Mukamel, R. et al. Coupling between neuronal firing, field potentials, and FMRI in human auditory cortex. Science 309, 951–954 (2005).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hermes, D. et al. Neurophysiologic correlates of fMRI in human motor cortex. Hum. Brain Mapp. 33, 1689–1699 (2012).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Manning, J.R., Jacobs, J., Fried, I. & Kahana, M.J. Broadband shifts in local field potential power spectra are correlated with single-neuron spiking in humans. J. Neurosci. 29, 13613–13620 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Klausberger, T. et al. Brain state– and cell type–specific firing of hippocampal interneurons in vivo. Nature 421, 844–848 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Canolty, R.T. et al. High gamma power is phase-locked to theta oscillations in human neocortex. Science 313, 1626–1628 (2006).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Miller, K.J. et al. Dynamic modulation of local population activity by rhythm phase in human occipital cortex during a visual search task. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 4, 197 (2010).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Voytek, B. et al. Hemicraniectomy: a new model for human electrophysiology with high spatio-temporal resolution. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 22, 2491–2502 (2010).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Buzsáki, G., Anastassiou, C.A. & Koch, C. The origin of extracellular fields and currents—EEG, ECoG, LFP and spikes. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 13, 407–420 (2012).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Foster, B.L. & Parvizi, J. Resting oscillations and cross-frequency coupling in the human posteromedial cortex. Neuroimage 60, 384–391 (2012).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Voytek, B. & Knight, R.T. Dynamic network communication as a unifying neural basis for cognition, development, aging, and disease. Biol. Psychiatry 77, 1089–1097 (2015).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Voytek, B., D'Esposito, M., Crone, N. & Knight, R.T. A method for event-related phase/amplitude coupling. Neuroimage 64, 416–424 (2013).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Szczepanski, S.M. et al. Dynamic changes in phase-amplitude coupling facilitate spatial attention control in fronto-parietal cortex. PLoS Biol. 12, e1001936 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Sweeney-Reed, C.M. et al. Corticothalamic phase synchrony and cross-frequency coupling predict human memory formation. eLife 3, e05352 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Lega, B., Burke, J., Jacobs, J. & Kahana, M.J. Slow-theta-to-gamma phase-amplitude coupling in human hippocampus supports the formation of new episodic memories. Cereb. Cortex published online, doi:10.1093/cercor/bhu232 (14 October 2014).10.1093/cercor/bhu232

  32. Fries, P. A mechanism for cognitive dynamics: neuronal communication through neuronal coherence. Trends Cogn. Sci. 9, 474–480 (2005).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Lakatos, P., Karmos, G., Mehta, A.D., Ulbert, I. & Schroeder, C.E. Entrainment of neuronal oscillations as a mechanism of attentional selection. Science 320, 110–113 (2008).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sirota, A. et al. Entrainment of neocortical neurons and gamma oscillations by the hippocampal theta rhythm. Neuron 60, 683–697 (2008).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Kayser, C., Montemurro, M.A., Logothetis, N.K. & Panzeri, S. Spike-phase coding boosts and stabilizes information carried by spatial and temporal spike patterns. Neuron 61, 597–608 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Cavanagh, J.F. & Frank, M.J. Frontal theta as a mechanism for cognitive control. Trends Cogn. Sci. 18, 414–421 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Cohen, M.X. & Donner, T.H. Midfrontal conflict-related theta-band power reflects neural oscillations that predict behavior. J. Neurophysiol. 110, 2752–2763 (2013).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Akam, T. & Kullmann, D.M. Oscillatory multiplexing of population codes for selective communication in the mammalian brain. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 15, 111–122 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Badre, D., Kayser, A.S. & D'Esposito, M. Frontal cortex and the discovery of abstract action rules. Neuron 66, 315–326 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Lisman, J.E. & Jensen, O. The Theta-Gamma Neural Code. Neuron 77, 1002–1016 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Watrous, A.J., Tandon, N., Conner, C.R., Pieters, T. & Ekstrom, A.D. Frequency-specific network connectivity increases underlie accurate spatiotemporal memory retrieval. Nat. Neurosci. 16, 349–356 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Siegel, M., Warden, M.R. & Miller, E.K. Phase-dependent neuronal coding of objects in short-term memory. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 21341–21346 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Buzsáki, G. & Moser, E.I. Memory, navigation and theta rhythm in the hippocampal-entorhinal system. Nat. Neurosci. 16, 130–138 (2013).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Engel, A.K. & Fries, P. Beta-band oscillations–signaling the status quo? Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 20, 156–165 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Buschman, T.J., Denovellis, E.L., Diogo, C., Bullock, D. & Miller, E.K. Synchronous oscillatory neural ensembles for rules in the prefrontal cortex. Neuron 76, 838–846 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Kopell, N., Whittington, M.A. & Kramer, M.A. Neuronal assembly dynamics in the beta1 frequency range permits short-term memory. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108, 3779–3784 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Kramer, M.A. et al. Rhythm generation through period concatenation in rat somatosensory cortex. PLoS Comput. Biol. 4, e1000169 (2008).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Saalmann, Y.B., Pinsk, M.A., Wang, L., Li, X. & Kastner, S. The pulvinar regulates information transmission between cortical areas based on attention demands. Science 337, 753–756 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Phillips, J.M., Vinck, M., Everling, S. & Womelsdorf, T. A Long-range fronto-parietal 5–10-hz network predicts 'top-down' controlled guidance in a task-switch paradigm. Cereb. Cortex 24, 1996–2008 (2014).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Cooper, P.S. et al. Theta frontoparietal connectivity associated with proactive and reactive cognitive control processes. Neuroimage 108, 354–363 (2015).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Delorme, A. & Makeig, S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J. Neurosci. Methods 134, 9–21 (2004).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Bruns, A. Fourier-, Hilbert- and wavelet-based signal analysis: are they really different approaches? J. Neurosci. Methods 137, 321–332 (2004).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Luk, C.-H. & Wallis, J.D. Dynamic encoding of responses and outcomes by neurons in medial prefrontal cortex. J. Neurosci. 29, 7526–7539 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Berens, P. CircStat: a MATLAB toolbox for circular statistics. J. Stat. Softw. 31, 1–21 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Lumley, T., Diehr, P., Emerson, S. & Chen, L. The importance of the normality assumption in large public health data sets. Annu. Rev. Public Health 23, 151–169 (2002).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank A. Flinker, J. Hoffman and A. Shestyuk for assistance with data collection, and C. Hamamé, T. Lee and B. Postle for useful comments and suggestions. B.V. is funded by a US National Institutes of Health (NIH) Institutional Research and Academic Career Development Award and the Society for Neuroscience Scholars Program. B.V. is funded by a US National Institutes of Health Institutional Research and Academic Career Development Award (GM081266) and the Society for Neuroscience Scholars Program. A.S.K. is funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the National Eye Institute. D.B., E.F.C., N.E.C., J.P. and R.T.K. are funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS065046, NS065120, NS40596, NS07839601, NS21135). R.T.K. is funded by the Nielsen Corporation. M.D. is funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the National Institute of Mental Health (MH063901).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA

    Bradley Voytek, David Fegen, Robert T Knight & Mark D'Esposito

  2. Division of Neurology, Department of Veterans Affairs, Martinez, California, USA

    Andrew S Kayser & Mark D'Esposito

  3. Department of Neurology, UCSF Center for Integrative Neuroscience, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA

    Andrew S Kayser

  4. Department of Cognitive, Linguistic and Psychological Sciences, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA

    David Badre

  5. Brown Institute for Brain Science, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA

    David Badre

  6. Department of Neurological Surgery, UCSF Center for Integrative Neuroscience, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA

    Edward F Chang

  7. Department of Physiology, UCSF Center for Integrative Neuroscience, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA

    Edward F Chang

  8. Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

    Nathan E Crone

  9. Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford Human Intracranial Cognitive Electrophysiology Program (SHICEP), Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA

    Josef Parvizi

  10. Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA

    Robert T Knight & Mark D'Esposito

Authors
  1. Bradley Voytek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrew S Kayser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Badre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David Fegen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Edward F Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nathan E Crone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Josef Parvizi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Robert T Knight
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Mark D'Esposito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

B.V., D.B., A.S.K., D.F., R.T.K. and M.D. conceived the study. D.B. and M.D. designed the experiments. D.F. collected the data. B.V. analyzed the data. E.F.C., N.E.C. and J.P. examined the subjects. All of the authors wrote the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bradley Voytek.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Integrated supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 1 Stimulus-locked electrophysiology.

Of the 140 frontal electrodes included in the analysis, 31 (22.1%) showed a significant main effect of task on stimulus-locked high gamma (80-150 Hz) amplitude. The figure above shows the average percent variance across time and frequency bands explained by the task-responsive electrodes. Although there is also significant encoding of task on theta and beta amplitude, the neurophysiological origin of changes in those bands are less clear and thus were not addressed in our manuscript.

Supplementary Figure 2 Frontal high gamma amplitude tracks trial-by-trial response times.

Stacked single trial M1/PMC high gamma activity sorted by response time for R1/R2 conditions demonstrates the high single trial high gamma signal-to-noise tracking motor response.

Supplementary Figure 3 Frequency specificity of phase encoding.

Plot showing the percent of phase-encoding electrode pairs broken out by location of the encoding pair (intraregional M1/PMC, interregional M1/PMC with PFC, and intraregional PFC) and by frequency band using 30 2-Hz overlapping passbands from 1 to 31 Hz. There is a clear density in the theta range (shaded region, 4-8 Hz). For electrodes within M1/PMC, there is also an increase in the mu-rhythm (8-12 Hz) range; this phenomenon was not further addressed in our current manuscript.

Supplementary Figure 4 Procedure for extracting high gamma analytic amplitude and theta phase from raw ECoG data.

The raw ECoG data is filtered in both the high gamma and theta bands, from which we extract estimates of the instantaneous high gamma analytic amplitude and theta phase. These allow us to examine the relationship between these signals and the task.

Supplementary Figure 5 Single-trial peak finding.

This figure shows an example of 20 individual theta phase encoding trials for one subject. Each individual trial is plotted as a blue line, with the 20-trial average plotted in black. The identified individual trial phase encoding peak is plotted as a black dot at the peak location. The two red vertical lines show the average phase encoding time as identified from the 20-trial average (left) or from the average of the 20 individual trial times (right). This result highlights the peak trial-by-trial encoding time variability that is masked by a group average.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Text and Figures

Supplementary Figures 1–5 (PDF 626 kb)

Supplementary Methods Checklist

(PDF 352 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Voytek, B., Kayser, A., Badre, D. et al. Oscillatory dynamics coordinating human frontal networks in support of goal maintenance. Nat Neurosci 18, 1318–1324 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4071

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4071

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing