Abstract
Cortical gamma oscillations occur alongside perceptual processes, and in proportion to perceptual salience. They have a number of properties that make them ideal candidates to explain perception, including incorporating synchronized discharges of neural assemblies, and their emergence over a fast timescale consistent with that of perception. These observations have led to widespread assumptions that gamma oscillations' role is to cause or facilitate conscious perception (i.e., a “positive” role). While the majority of the human literature on gamma oscillations is consistent with this interpretation, many or most of these studies could equally be interpreted as showing a suppressive or inhibitory (i.e., “negative”) role. For example, presenting a stimulus and recording a response of increased gamma oscillations would only suggest a role for gamma oscillations in the representation of that stimulus, and would not specify what that role were; if gamma oscillations were inhibitory, then they would become selectively activated in response to the stimulus they acted to inhibit. In this review, we consider two classes of gamma oscillations: “broadband” and “narrowband,” which have very different properties (and likely roles). We first discuss studies on gamma oscillations that are non-discriminatory, with respect to the role of gamma oscillations, followed by studies that specifically support specifically a positive or negative role. These include work on perception in healthy individuals, and in the pathological contexts of phantom perception and epilepsy. Reference is based as much as possible on magnetoencephalography (MEG) and electroencephalography (EEG) studies, but we also consider evidence from invasive recordings in humans and other animals. Attempts are made to reconcile findings within a common framework. We conclude with a summary of the pertinent questions that remain unanswered, and suggest how future studies might address these.
Introduction
Background
The term “gamma oscillations” refers to periodic fluctuations, in the local field potential of a neuronal structure, at a rate of over 30–40 Hz (the exact lower limit varying between different reports). Definitions of upper frequency limits to the gamma frequency range are highly variable, ranging anywhere from 48 (Fujioka et al., ) to 300 Hz (Steinschneider et al., 2008). At a neuronal circuit level, multiple mechanisms have been demonstrated to underlie gamma oscillations; all of these are driven by a process of synchronized periodic inhibition generated either by inhibitory GABAergic interneurons or, in a more physiological context, their interactions with excitatory glutamatergic neurons (Whittington et al., 1995, 2011). Inhibitory functional roles of gamma oscillations could include an intrinsic “brake” to prevent excessive neural responses to intrinsic or extrinsic stimulation (Kirschfeld, ) and/or a mechanism to suppress behaviorally irrelevant stimuli or stimulus features. While the immediate action of GABAergic interneurons is clearly inhibitory, the effect of ensuing gamma oscillations on the neural systems in which they occur need not be. For instance, firing of excitatory neurons preferentially occurs during a particular phase of gamma oscillations, corresponding to the period of minimal inhibition. Therefore, the summated excitatory post-synaptic potentials (EPSPs) generated by these neurons could cross the threshold for triggering action potentials in postsynaptic cells more readily under conditions of periodic inhibition than if they fired uniformly without being subject to an inhibitory influence (Tiesinga et al., 2004). Such a mechanism would increase overall neural activity in the postsynaptic neural population and impart the same gamma rhythm to that activity.
Recent years have seen a substantial and growing interest in gamma oscillations, particularly with regard to their role in higher cognitive processes such as perception (Gray et al., ; Lachaux et al., ; Gross et al., ; Griffiths et al., ), attention (Gruber et al., ; Sokolov et al., ; Bauer et al., ; Ray et al., ) and memory (Osipova et al., ; Weinberger et al., 2006). In almost all published experiments on gamma oscillations, they increase in magnitude (reflecting increased power, synchrony or both) in the presence of the stimulus or process under study. As well as this positive, and almost ubiquitous, association with a large range of higher level processes, gamma oscillations have a number of properties that make them an attractive candidate neural correlate of high-level processes. These include their occurrence on a timescale of tens of milliseconds, consistent with that on which perception occurs, and their synchrony between anatomically separate neural assemblies, which has been proposed as a solution to the “binding problem” of consciousness (Singer and Gray, ). However, these observations alone fall vastly short of proving a generative role for gamma oscillations in high-level processes. While such a “positive” role seems possible given the available evidence, it is also plausible that gamma oscillations could have a very different role with respect to these processes, and could actually inhibit rather than facilitate them. Such a suggestion may seem counter-intuitive; we have major unsolved questions in neuroscience, such as how the brain generates coherent complex perceptions out of distributed individual elements, and gamma oscillations seem to be the best fit solution out of known phenomena. However there are also many other processes, lacking full explanations, that could as plausibly be mediated by gamma oscillations, many of which are “negative”; these could include suppression of behaviorally irrelevant stimuli, uninformative stimulus features or noise, preventing excessive neural activity or otherwise serving as a “gating” mechanism. All of these need to occur on the same timescale as high level neural processes and involve the co-ordinated action of neural assemblies, and thus could be fulfilled by gamma oscillations.
As an example of the distinction between “positive” and “negative” roles for gamma oscillations, let us consider the situation where a stimulus activates the visual system, and consequently the visual cortex receives a large amount of incoming information. This includes signals representing various retinotopic locations in terms of luminance, color, motion and local contrasts in these features. A “positive” role for gamma oscillations in processing this information could include grouping together all of these features that represent the same visual object so that they could be processed as a coherent whole. Thus, an enhancement of the local gamma activity would lead to an increased tendency to process a visual scene as a smaller number of objects, each containing a larger number of features. Conversely, suppressing gamma oscillations would lead to the visual scene being perceived as a larger number of separate stimuli, each containing fewer features. Such changes could be demonstrated, for instance, using a paradigm that presented visual stimuli that were ambiguous in terms of how many distinct objects they represented, and asking subjects to state how many objects were present in each trial. A different “positive” role for gamma oscillations could be that they facilitate the forward-transfer of information through the cortical hierarchy. Thus, enhancement of gamma oscillations would lead to stronger or faster conscious perception or behavioral responses to stimuli. Gamma suppression would have the opposite effect. A “negative” role for gamma could include the opposite of this role; namely that gamma oscillations could act to prevent the forward-transfer of certain stimulus-related information. This could, for instance, constitute a mechanism for suppressing the representation of behaviorally-irrelevant stimuli or stimulus features. Similarly, gamma oscillations could act to cause a similar suppression of stimuli or stimulus features at the local level, by suppressing their neural representations. Such a mechanism would be important for mediating competition between stimuli or stimulus features. If this were the case, enhancement of gamma oscillations would lead to reduced onward transmission of stimulus information, with the perceptual consequences of either fewer stimuli or fewer stimulus features being perceived, or stimuli being perceived as less salient. Although perceived as less salient, it would be likely that the perceived stimulus features were selected as those with the highest discriminatory value or behavioral relevance. Suppression of gamma oscillations would have the opposite effect, with larger number of stimuli or stimulus features being more saliently perceived, with a likely tendency toward poorer perceptual discrimination due to an inability to filter out irrelevant information.
Besides “positive” or “negative” roles, gamma oscillations could potentially serve roles that are neutral or variable with respect to their net effect on perception/cognition, serve multiple roles or be epiphenomena of different neural process.
Types of gamma oscillations
In-vitro studies have identified multiple alternative cellular mechanisms for the generation of cortical gamma oscillations, which are driven by different interneuron types and have distinct functional correlates (Whittington et al., 2011). Ideally we would be to be able to directly relate gamma oscillations observed with MEG and EEG to their underlying neuronal mechanisms, but such distinctions are generally not currently possible in most studies. Some attempts have been made to delineate specific gamma frequency bands, most notably distinguishing “gamma” from “high gamma” (Edwards et al., ; Canolty et al., ; Ray et al., ). The thresholds for separating these bands have been somewhat variable, but there is some evidence from auditory cortex recordings for differing behaviors of these two frequency bands within the same experiment (Edwards et al., ). However most studies have not gone as far as this in specifically commenting on disparities between different gamma bands, so in this review we will not focus on subtyping gamma according to frequency band alone. One crucial distinction between types of gamma oscillation that needs to be made is between narrowband and broadband gamma. Recent studies using invasive recordings in macaque visual cortex (Jia et al., ; Ray and Maunsell, ) have clearly identified two modes of gamma oscillation. These are illustrated in Figures 2C,D, along with examples from the human literature on likely equivalents of each mode of gamma oscillation (G–I). The first is a broadband gamma, typically starting at 30 Hz and extending upwards to at least 160 Hz (Jia et al., ; Ray and Maunsell, ), which is predominantly transient following stimulus onset, and correlates positively with multi-unit activity. This is exemplified in Figure 2D. The correlation of broadband high-frequency gamma oscillations with multi-unit spiking activity is so strong that it has been proposed that they simply reflect spectral leakage from multi-unit activity (Jacobs et al., ). Recent recordings from rat hippocampus in vivo have found two types of local field potential fluctuations in the range of higher gamma frequencies, one being leakage from multi-unit activity and the other being a true oscillation (Scheffer-Teixeira et al., ); these types of activity had subtly different properties that made them distinguishable. The principal differences were that “true oscillations” occupied a distinct frequency band (albeit a broad one), rather than an indefinite frequency range, and occurred during a different part of the theta phase cycle. However, the information required to make this distinction is not available in most existing studies of gamma oscillations, and therefore in this review we do not attempt a separation of these types of broadband gamma-range activity. The second type of oscillation in the gamma range is a narrowband (or “bump”) gamma, centered around 40–50 Hz with a bandwidth of around 10–20 Hz, as illustrated in Figure 2C. This occurs only in response to certain stimuli, whose characteristics include relatively large size and strong luminance contrasts at particular spatial frequencies, one example of which is shown in Figure 2A. The magnitude of this type of gamma oscillation varies inversely with multi-unit activity (Jia et al., ; Ray and Maunsell, ), as illustrated in Figure 2F. Human MEG and EEG studies using similarly large visual stimuli with high luminance contrasts (e.g., gratings and checkerboards) elicit a type of gamma oscillation with similar characteristics (i.e., narrowband and persistent for the duration of the stimulus) that have a slightly higher center frequency than in the macaque of around 60 Hz (Adjamian et al., ; Muthukumaraswamy et al., ; Scheeringa et al., ). An example of such narrowband gamma oscillations in humans is shown in Figure 2G. Another feature of narrowband visual gamma is that it is unexpectedly strong, often representing the dominant change in the power spectrum over and above changes in lower frequencies which are usually orders of magnitude stronger (Hoogenboom et al., ). Studies in other sensory domains have not identified narrowband gamma oscillations as in the visual system. Auditory stimulus-induced gamma oscillations mainly occur at higher frequencies of above around 80 Hz, occupy a broader frequency range and generally occur predominantly transiently to stimulus transitions (Edwards et al., ; Griffiths et al., ; Sedley et al., ). An example of auditory cortex gamma oscillations in response to stimulus onset and a stimulus transition is shown in Figure 2I. While lower frequency gamma oscillations are sometimes detected in response to auditory stimuli they are less abundant, not occurring in electrocorticography (ECoG) studies in the absence of higher frequency gamma (Edwards et al., ; Griffiths et al., ), and in MEG studies requiring very large numbers of trials to detect (Fujioka et al., ). In auditory cortex in vitro, however, two anatomically and functionally distinct gamma generators operate (Ainsworth et al., ), one generating a 30–45 Hz rhythm and one a 50–80 Hz rhythm, but it remains to be seen how these relate to macroscopically-recorded stimulus-induced rhythms. Gamma in somatosensory cortex, exemplified in Figures 4D,E appears similar to that in auditory cortex (Bauer et al., ; Gross et al., ; Ray et al., ), being predominantly relatively high frequency, broadband and transient for hundreds of milliseconds following stimulus onset.
While it is not certain that the broadband mode of visual gamma oscillation represents the same underlying neural process as auditory and somatosensory gamma oscillations, there is no clear evidence that it represents a different process either. Therefore, for the purposes of this review, the only distinction we will make between types of cortical gamma oscillation is between “narrowband” gamma oscillations (in normal perception reported only in visual cortex in response to specific stimulus properties) and “broadband” gamma, representing all other types. We do not mean to imply that what we call “broadband” is either homogenous in its frequency spectrum or extends through the whole gamma frequency range, but just that it is broadband compared to the specific “narrowband” visual gamma and does not share its properties of persistence or sole association with specific stimulus properties. Gamma oscillations are usually quantified using a type of time-frequency transformation of either directly-recorded or reconstructed source data. Such methods commonly include wavelet analyses, and the multi-taper method fast Fourier transform (MTMFFT). In any time-frequency decomposition, a trade-off must be made between resolution in time and resolution in frequency, and this is determined by the parameters used for the analysis. It is therefore possible, in certain instances, to make oscillatory activity appear to be broader or narrow in its frequency band than it actually is. In conducting this review, we have therefore taken the apparent time-frequency parameters into account when categorizing reported gamma activity as broadband or narrowband. We have also taken into account the time course of gamma activity and the stimuli used to induce it. In most instances there has been concordance between these factors, and we have therefore been confident in attributing a “broadband” or “narrowband” label. Furthermore, many studies clearly measured both broadband and narrowband components, which were readily distinguishable from each other. In any unusual cases where it was not clear, we have stated that we cannot be sure which type of gamma oscillation is represented.
Measuring gamma oscillations
Gamma oscillations are easily measured using invasive recordings, to the point that they can be used for functional mapping purposes akin to traditional robust responses such as event-related potentials (ERPs; Jerbi et al., ; Nourski et al., ). Non-invasive EEG and MEG can be used to detect equivalent patterns of gamma oscillations as recorded invasively, though with a vastly lower signal to noise ratio which often means that source space reconstructions are required in order to detect these gamma oscillations above noise (Dalal et al., ; Sedley et al., ). Several human MEG studies have found gamma responses with equivalent stimulus-dependencies to those found with invasive recordings in macaques, suggesting that these two different approaches are measuring the same underlying neural processes (Swettenham et al., 2009; van Pelt and Fries, 2013; Perry et al., ). A significant concern relates to the detection of visually-induced gamma oscillations using scalp EEG (Yuval-Greenberg et al., 2008). The study in question found that, in EEG with channels referenced to the nose or average reference (as were common practice), the appearance of transient broadband gamma oscillations could be generated in occipital electrodes around 300 ms after stimulus onset; these apparent “gamma oscillations” could be attributed entirely to ocular micro-saccades contaminating the EEG reference. Due to these serious concerns with the validity of EEG studies on transient broadband visual gamma using such methods, we will not include in this review EEG studies likely to be compromised by this issue. MEG studies, source space modeling studies and work on other sensory modalities should not be affected by these artefacts.
Scope of review
Establishing the role of cortical gamma oscillations is important for understanding brain function, but also of practical importance, as abnormalities of gamma oscillations are present in pathological conditions such as phantom perception, epilepsy and schizophrenia. In these conditions, detection of abnormal gamma behavior could potentially help in diagnosis or subtyping, and correction of it could be beneficial therapeutically. For these purposes, gamma oscillations need to be detectable non-invasively, either with electroencephalography (EEG) or magnetoencephalography (MEG). This review presents a summary of selected experimental evidence on gamma oscillations occurring in cortex. Some examples are given of studies that do not help to distinguish positive from negative roles of gamma oscillations (“non-discriminatory” studies). The design of an archetypal non-discriminatory study is that a stimulus is presented and neural activity is compared between the stimulus and pre-stimulus periods. In such studies it would be clear that the neural responses could indicate any direct or indirect consequence of the stimulus. We highlight studies that are less obviously non-discriminatory, but share the confounding factor that input strength to the cortical area under study is likely to have increased as a function of the cognitive effect under study; thus observed gamma oscillations could reflect any downstream consequence of this increased input (see Figure 1). Subsequently, a discussion is presented of studies whose findings favor either a positive or negative role of gamma oscillations. We discuss gamma oscillations with respect to normal perception, and in the pathological contexts of phantom perception (tinnitus and phantom pain) and epilepsy. Cited evidence is kept as focused on human non-invasive imaging as possible but, where it is helpful in the interpretation of non-invasive imaging studies, some evidence is drawn from invasive recording studies in humans and animals. The convention in this review is that “increases” or “decreases” in “gamma” refer to changes in the amplitude or power of gamma oscillations, as opposed to changes in frequency or phase. In some instances we do refer to gamma frequency (i.e., frequency of the dominant spectral peak), and in these cases this is clearly stated.
Figure 1
Normal perception
Narrowband visual gamma
Non-discriminatory studies on narrowband visual gamma
Visual cortex narrowband gamma oscillations are a highly-studied phenomenon that occurs in response to visual stimuli with certain properties. These include large size, (Jia et al., ; Ray and Maunsell, ) high luminance contrast (with color contrast alone not eliciting any such gamma oscillations despite producing an equal magnitude blood oxygen level dependent [BOLD] response as measured with functional magnetic resonance imaging [fMRI]; Adjamian et al., ; Swettenham et al., 2013) and regularly-repeating luminance contrasts within a specific range of spatial frequencies (Adjamian et al., ). As this type of gamma is specific to a narrow range of stimuli, it is highly unlikely to represent the definitive neural correlate of a widely abundant process such as conscious perception. It is noteworthy that the stimulus conditions required to produce narrowband visual gamma are the same ones that induce visual illusions (such as of color and/or movement) and often lead to unpleasant subjective sensations (Adjamian et al., ). While it is likely that this type of gamma has a role with respect to such illusions, the association alone does not suggest in favor of either a causal or inhibitory role. Invasive recordings in primate visual cortex have found that the phase of narrowband gamma in V1 correlates with multi-unit spiking patterns in V1, and also both gamma phase and spiking patterns in V2 (Jia et al., ). Furthermore, V2 spiking was predicted much more by V1 than V2 gamma phase. Similarly, it has recently been shown that endogenous and stimulus-driven fluctuations in the frequency of narrowband visual gamma in macaque V1 are instantaneously mirrored by the frequency of gamma in V2 (Roberts et al., ). These results suggest a process of gamma-mediated gating of feed-forward activity, but in isolation are non-discriminatory about what the role of this process in perception. As well as local connectivity, narrowband visual gamma also exhibits long-range synchrony in the visual pathway under conditions of attention (Gregoriou et al., ). Human studies have found that the center frequency of narrowband visual gamma depends upon the local concentration of GABA (Muthukumaraswamy et al., ), is inversely correlated to the stimulus-induced BOLD response fMRI (Muthukumaraswamy et al., ) and is positively correlated to performance on visual orientation discrimination tasks (Edden et al., ). Such findings point to a functional role of visual narrowband gamma in stimulus selection, but not specifically to the nature of that role. Similarly, it has been found that the magnitude of visual stimulus-induced narrowband gamma oscillations in middle occipital gyrus immediately before and after a change in that stimulus positively predict the speed with which that change is detected (Hoogenboom et al., ). This suggests a functional role of narrowband gamma in efficient visual processing, but does not point toward the specific nature of that role. In a positive role, a larger gamma amplitude could lead to a stronger sensory representation of the stimulus and therefore faster change detection. Conversely, in an inhibitory role, increased gamma amplitude could act to better attenuate irrelevant stimulus features, facilitating a more rapid identification of changes in relevant features. Also noteworthy is the finding that the peak frequency of narrowband visual gamma is strongly heritable (van Pelt et al., 2012).
It has been found that selective attention to a particular visual stimulus increases the narrow-band gamma response to that stimulus in macaque V4 (Fries et al., ). It is worth emphasizing that attentional modulation of a neural response does not necessarily imply a facilitative role of that response in attention or perception; in many cases augmentation by attention could simply reflect a consequence of increased bottom-up or top-down input to the cortical area under study (see Figure 1). In the visual system there is evidence for modulation of pre-cortical activity as a function of attention (O'Connor et al., ), and there is also the possibility of V4 responses simply reflecting downstream consequences of different processes in hierarchically lower visual cortical areas. In this particular macaque study attention-related increases in gamma power were accompanied by decreases in beta-band power. This response pattern reflects an exaggeration of the usual response pattern to visual contrast stimuli (Hoogenboom et al., ), and as such could reflect a predictable response to attentional effects earlier in the visual hierarchy. Human MEG work on narrowband visual gamma oscillations in V1 found that attention did not increase these narrowband oscillations, but did cause a broadband enhancement in gamma power in the same cortical area (Koelewijn et al., ).
Evidence for a “positive” role of narrowband visual gamma
In a behavioral paradigm, in macaques, involving reactions to a change in an attended stimulus in the presence of a spatially separate distractor, it has been found that peristimulus narrowband gamma oscillations in V4 have a strong predictive effect on reaction time (Womelsdorf et al., 2006); increased gamma in neurons representing the attended stimulus predicted fast responses, and increased gamma associated with the distractor predicted slow reaction times. This observation could suggest a positive role of narrowband gamma in generating representations of stimulus change, but an effect carried forward from earlier in the visual hierarchy cannot be confidently excluded. Recent work, also in macaque visual cortex, has studied the effect of selective attention toward one of two competing stimuli on gamma oscillations (Bosman et al., ); gamma oscillations in V1 associated with the attended stimulus showed a stronger correlation with, and causal influence over, gamma in V4 than those associated with the unattended stimulus. This finding is consistent with gamma mediating stimulus selection, as discussed in section Non-Discriminatory Studies on Narrowband Visual Gamma, but favors a positive role for gamma in this process, since it is the gamma associated with the attended stimulus that appears to most influence onward activity. A study using visual grating stimuli of low luminance contrast (close to subjects' thresholds for conscious perception) compared neural response patterns between stimuli that were perceived and those that were not (Wyart and Tallon-Baudry, 2008). No systematic differences between stimuli were present between these categories. It was found that narrowband gamma responses were stronger in response to perceived vs. non-perceived stimuli. Attention was controlled for, and did not influence these narrowband gamma results. Interestingly, the overall gamma response was fairly broad band, but the perception-related gamma enhancement only occurred in a narrow frequency band. Similarly, a study of a single hemianopia patient, who only sometimes perceived stimuli in their hemianopia visual field, found that perceived stimuli were associated with stronger narrowband gamma responses than non-perceived repetitions of the same stimuli (Schurger et al., ). However, in the latter study only, other cortical responses were not reported, so one cannot be completely confident that the gamma response differences were not simply part of an exaggerated overall response pattern.
Evidence for a “negative” role of narrowband visual gamma
In considering narrowband gamma oscillations as an inhibitory process, one must consider the limited range of stimulus conditions under which such oscillations occur. As previously mentioned, these include regular repeating strong luminance contrasts within a certain range of spatial frequencies, but not equally-salient color contrasts, or weak luminance contrasts. Thus, if narrowband visual gamma serves an inhibitory role, it appears that there is something unique about multiple strong luminance contrasts within a comparatively large stimulus that needs to be suppressed. Both high luminance contrast and large size of a stimulus have been shown to bias visual processing toward that stimulus (Proulx and Egeth, ), so it is probable that these features also trigger particularly strong neural responses compared to other visual features. With this in mind, is seems possible that narrowband visual gamma oscillations might act to balance the processing of a visual scene by reducing the excessively strong representation of specific visual feature combinations that would otherwise be over-represented.
Although a direct experimental comparison has not been performed, it is noteworthy that the conditions required to generate narrowband visual gamma appear to be identical to those necessary to cause the perceptual phenomenon of surround suppression (Tadin et al., 2003): i.e., large size (above around 2°), high luminance contrast and particular spatial frequencies. This phenomenon involves poorer performance on perceptual discrimination tasks involving larger but otherwise equivalent stimuli (i.e., the larger stimuli contain all the information found in the smaller ones and more, without any conflicting features, yet are associated with worse performance). Supportive of such a role of narrowband visual gamma in mediating surround suppression is the finding that progressively increasing the size of a high-contrast visual stimulus into neurons' suppressive surrounds increases narrowband gamma while reducing multi-unit activity in macaque V1 (Gieselmann and Thiele, ). Figure 2 illustrates surround suppression, in terms of a typical causative stimulus (A), the psychophysical effect (B), and the antagonistic relationship between narrowband gamma and other measures of local neural activity (E–F). It also bears mention that as well as narrowband gamma oscillations only being described in the visual system, perceptual surround suppression has likewise only been demonstrated in the visual system. Further to the demonstration of increased gamma in macaque V4 as a function of selective attention, similar experiments recording simultaneously from V1 found that selective attention was associated with reduced gamma oscillation spike-field coherence (SFC) in V1, yet still showed increased gamma in V4 as previously found (Chalk et al., ). These findings are illustrated in Figure 3B. This observation is incompatible with pre-cortical activity changes carried forward, pointing instead toward a role of gamma in inhibiting cortical responses and an effect of attention being a release from gamma-mediated inhibition. Such an explanation would propose that the release from inhibition in V1 would lead to increased input to V4, and therefore increased narrowband gamma in V4 as a downstream consequence of this (see Figure 3C). In perceptual terms, the attention-related disinhibition in V1 might increase the volume of stimulus-related information reaching V4, which would then be acted on by enhanced inhibitory responses that would inhibit irrelevant or excessive stimulus representations. Alternatively it could be that narrowband gamma serves different roles depending on the visual area in which it occurs. Consistent with these findings, human ECoG work using monochrome face stimuli found that early visual areas showed a decrease in gamma power coinciding with face presentation, while higher visual areas showed gamma power increases (Lachaux et al., ), as shown in Figure 3A. However, it is worth noting that the gamma frequency bands in this study were not definitely comparable to the previously mentioned macaque studies; early visual area power decreases appeared to include broadband and narrowband components, while increases in later visual areas were more broadband. Further support for a role of narrowband visual gamma in perceptual inhibition comes from recordings from cat V1; in a study of various interocular rivalry conditions, narrowband gamma responses to a visual stimulus increased dramatically where a second competing stimulus was added (Fries et al., ). The finding favors a role of gamma in mediating stimulus competition, possibly through inhibition of the “losing” stimulus, as opposed to a role in generating the percept of the “winning” stimulus (if this were the case the gamma change between conditions should be in the opposite direction or absent).
Figure 2
Figure 3

Divergent trends in gamma oscillation responses in different areas of visual cortex. (A) Gamma response to a face stimulus in V1 (lower—showing predominantly narrowband gamma power decrease) and in fusiform gyrus (upper—showing broadband gamma power increase) in the same human patient (reproduced with copyright-holder's permission from Lachaux et al.,
Broadband gamma oscillations in normal perception
Non-discriminatory studies on broadband gamma oscillations
Broadband gamma power does not occur in isolation, but has been found, in multiple cortical areas, to be heavily influenced by the phase of low-frequency theta oscillations, preferentially occurring at a particular point in the theta cycle (Canolty et al.,
Evidence for a “positive” role of broadband gamma
As mentioned previously, intracranial human recordings have found enhanced broadband gamma responses, as shown in Figure 2H, to visual stimuli that elicit a gestalt percept (impression of a meaningful coherent visual object as opposed to a collection of abstract features) compared to responses to non-gestalt stimuli that are otherwise equivalent (Lachaux et al.,
Evidence for a “negative” role of broadband gamma
There is limited human evidence for broadband gamma having a negative role. It has been shown that prestimulus gamma power in visual cortex, recorded intracranially, has a negative effect on the ERP elicited by the subsequent stimulus (Privman et al.,
A unifying role for broadband gamma oscillations?
With broadband gamma oscillations being positively associated with such a wide range of perceptual and cognitive processes, it seems likely that their role is something that is relatively ubiquitous in terms of brain function. For reasons including the tight coupling with other measures of neural population activity, it has been proposed that broadband gamma represents nothing more specific than activation of a neural population (Merker,
Phantom perception
Introduction to phantom perception
Phantom perception can technically be considered a form of hallucination, in that it involves the perception of a sensory object that does not result from stimulation from the environment. However, in practical terms it can be typically be distinguished from more complex hallucinations on the basis of involving simple percepts, and resulting from neural changes following de-affarentation of sensory systems (Jastreboff,
Non-discriminatory studies of gamma oscillations in phantom perception
An important discovery has been the demonstration, with direct recordings from the modality-specific thalami of patients with phantom perception, of persistent low-frequency spike bursts (Jeanmonod et al.,
Figure 4

Gamma oscillations in phantom and normal somatosensory and auditory perception. (A–C) Gamma oscillations in phantom perceptual conditions are very high amplitude and easily visualized. (A) Raw scalp EEG waveforms from a patient with somatic phantom perception. Note the gamma oscillations dominate the entire EEG spectrum, whereas even the strongest gamma oscillations in response to external sensory stimuli cannot be seen without significant post-processing (reproduced with copyright-holder's permission from Baldeweg et al.,
Evidence for a “positive” role of gamma oscillations in phantom perception
The strongest evidence for a positive role of gamma in tinnitus, as discussed in section Non-Discriminatory Studies of Gamma Oscillations in Phantom Perception, is that resting-state auditory cortex gamma oscillations positively correlate with subjective tinnitus loudness (van der Loo et al., 2009). While this is compatible with a positive role for gamma in generating the tinnitus percept, very little information was given about what the subjective scale was actually rating. Theoretically there is an important distinction between overall tinnitus loudness, indicating how loud their tinnitus is on a typical day compared to a range of environmental sounds, and current tinnitus loudness, indicating how loud the tinnitus is on the day of study with respect to its usual range of fluctuation. Overall tinnitus loudness would likely include an increased cortical input, and therefore a positive association with gamma magnitude would not be very informative, whereas a tight association between current tinnitus loudness and gamma would be more compelling for a positive role of gamma, provided it were not accompanied by equivalent delta/theta changes. Unfortunately the study did not make this distinction, so a role of gamma cannot be clearly inferred from its findings. Outside of tinnitus, gamma oscillatory abnormalities have been reported in a highly unusual single case of idiopathic phantom somatosensory perception (Baldeweg et al.,
Evidence for a “negative” role of gamma oscillations in phantom perception
Examining the specific role of gamma oscillations in phantom perception should ideally involve dynamic modulations of the percept's intensity, along with a way of dissociating the gamma response from the low-frequency cortical inputs that trigger it. This is difficult to achieve, but has been fortuitously accomplished through a phenomenon called residual excitation (RE; Sedley et al.,
What type of gamma oscillation is associated with phantom perception?
As discussed in section Types of Gamma Oscillations in the context of normal perception, narrowband gamma (which is also unexpectedly high amplitude and persistent for the stimulus duration) appears only to occur in visual cortex, in response to very specific stimuli, while to our knowledge there have been no demonstrations of a similar mode of gamma in auditory or somatosensory cortices. However, there are some characteristics of the gamma oscillations associated with tinnitus, mentioned in sections Non-Discriminatory Studies of Gamma Oscillations in Phantom Perception, Evidence for a “Positive” Role of Gamma Oscillations in Phantom Perception and Evidence for a “Negative” Role of Gamma Oscillations in Phantom Perception, that invite the question of whether they might be related to narrowband visual gamma. The first of these is that, while gamma oscillatory responses to even very salient external auditory stimuli are extremely weak when recorded with MEG (Nourski et al.,
Epilepsy
Pathological “gamma” oscillations in epilepsy
High frequency oscillations (ripples and fast ripples; typically above 70–100 Hz) are strongly implicated in epileptogenesis, being associated with both interictal spikes (Andrade-Valença et al.,
Non-discriminatory studies of gamma oscillations in epilepsy
It has been found that the particular stimulus properties giving rise to narrowband gamma in the visual system are the same ones that tend to trigger photoparoxysmal discharges (interictal epileptiform activity) in patients with photosensitive epilepsy (Adjamian et al.,
Figure 5

Abnormalities of the gamma response to intermittent photic stimulation (IPS) in photosensitive epilepsy (PS). (A) Logarithmic power spectra of local field potential in occipital EEG electrodes at rest (left) and during intermittent photic stimulation at 14 Hz (IPS; right), in a healthy control (upper) and a photosensitive epilepsy patient (lower). In the IPS condition, the stimulation frequency (14 Hz) is indicated by the dashed line. Note the resting-state power spectrum (left) shows more distinct peaks, mainly in the gamma range, in the PS patient (lower) than in the healthy control (upper); also that during IPS (right) the PS patient shows clear peaks at harmonics of the stimulation frequency, again mainly in the gamma range, indicating excessive entrainment of ongoing oscillatory brain rhythms to extrinsic stimulation in PS (reproduced with copyright-holder's permission from Visani et al., 2010). (B) Illustration of the concept of the Phase Clustering Index (PCI) in relation to IPS leading to (red) and not leading to (blue) a photoparoxysmal response (PPR; a type of stimulus-induced epileptiform activity). Each arrow represents one harmonic of the IPS frequency, with its direction indicating the phase of the oscillation. In the “no PPR” condition (blue) the oscillatory phases at the harmonic frequencies appear to be randomly distributed, while in the “PPR” condition (red) they are clustered around a common phase angle. The PPR is quantified as the vector sum of all the arrows in a particular condition. (C) Relative phase clustering index (rPCI) values, in response to IPS, in (left to right) normal controls, patients with non-photosensitive epilepsy, PS patients in trials not triggering a PPR, and PS patients in trials triggering a PPR. Note only trials associated with a PPR are associated with an abnormally high rPCI (reproduced with copyright-holder's permission from Parra et al.,
Conclusions
Key findings
We have found that the most common factor limiting interpretation of studies on gamma oscillations is a definite or potential increase in input to the relevant cortical area as a function of the effect under study (see Figure 1). Where this is the case, gamma oscillation changes can always be plausibly explained as a secondary consequence of altered cortical input. Similarly, if gamma oscillation changes occur only as part of an exaggeration of the whole stimulus-induced response pattern then it is difficult to claim any special status of the gamma oscillations over and above any other changes in local neural activity. We have highlighted several clear distinctions between “broadband” and “narrowband” gamma, and have thus treated them as separate entities. Narrowband gamma, in the setting of normal perception, appears only to occur in visual cortex, and only in response to stimuli known to cause perceptual surround suppression (Tadin et al., 2003; Adjamian et al.,
Outstanding questions
While there is clear and increasing evidence for both specific positive and inhibitory roles of narrowband gamma in normal perception, its role with respect to epileptogenesis remains very unclear, and direct experimental evidence of its effect on epileptiform activity is required in order to address this question. Narrowband gamma has only been convincingly demonstrated in visual cortex, and it is unclear whether it is biologically restricted to the visual system, or rather that it can exist in other sensory modalities and the appropriate stimuli have simply not been tested. Also unclear is to what extent gamma in phantom perception relates to narrowband gamma. If it is the same process then it remains unknown why phantom perception in auditory and somatosensory cortices can generate it but external stimulation to the same cortices apparently cannot, while if it represents a different process to sensory gamma oscillations then questions remain about what this process is and why it should be unique to phantom perception.
Recommendations for future research
We suggest that future research should aim to selectively focus on the role of gamma oscillations by: accounting for the strength of both cortical input and onward connections, e.g., by experimental design or quantitative estimation; ideally using a model of effective connectivity (Chen et al.,
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Statements
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to Dr. Gareth Barnes for helpful comments and suggestions on the manuscript. We wish to thank Dr. Markus Butz and Prof. Krish Singh for hosting the Frontiers research topic, and Dr. Butz also for his encouragement to write this review. William Sedley is a Medical Research Council (MRC) Clinical Research Training Fellow, funded by the Medical Research Council.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1
AdjamianP.BarnesG. R.HollidayI. E. (2008). Induced gamma activity in primary visual cortex is related to luminance and not color contrast: an MEG study. J. Vis. 8, 1–7. 10.1167/8.7.4
2
AdjamianP.HollidayI. E.BarnesG. R.HillebrandHadjipapasA.SinghK. D. (2004). Induced visual illusions and gamma oscillations in human primary visual cortex. Eur. J. Neurosci. 20, 587–592. 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2004.03495.x
3
AdjamianP.SeredaM.ZobayO.HallD. A.PalmerA. R. (2012). Neuromagnetic indicators of tinnitus and tinnitus masking in patients with and without hearing loss. J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol. 13, 715–731. 10.1007/s10162-012-0340-5
4
AinsworthM.LeeS.CunninghamM. O.RoopunA. K.TraubR. D.KopellN. J.et al. (2011). Dual γ rhythm generators control interlaminar synchrony in auditory cortex. J. Neurosci. 31, 17040–17051. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2209-11.2011
5
Andrade-ValençaL.MariF.JacobsJ.ZijlmansM.OlivierA.GotmanJ.et al. (2012). Interictal high frequency oscillations (HFOs) in patients with focal epilepsy and normal MRI. Clin. Neurophysiol. 123, 100–105. 10.1016/j.clinph.2011.06.004
6
ArnalL. H.GiraudA.-L. (2012). Cortical oscillations and sensory predictions. Trends Cogn. Sci. 16, 390–398. 10.1016/j.tics.2012.05.003
7
ArnalL. H.WyartV.GiraudA.-L. (2011). Transitions in neural oscillations reflect prediction errors generated in audiovisual speech. Nat. Neurosci. 14, 797–801. 10.1038/nn.2810
8
AshtonH.ReidK.MarshR.JohnsonI.AlterK.GriffithsT. (2007). High frequency localised ‘Hot Spots’ in temporal lobes of patients with intractable tinnitus: a quantitative electroencephalographic (QEEG) study. Neurosci. Lett. 426, 23–28. 10.1016/j.neulet.2007.08.034
9
BaldewegT.SpenceS.HirschS.GruzelierJ. (1998). Gamma Oscillations in a Patient with Somatic Hallucinations. Lancet352, 620–621. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)79575-1
10
BastosA. M.UsreyW. M.AdamsR. A.MangunG. R.FriesP.FristonK. J. (2012). Canonical microcircuits for predictive coding. Neuron76, 695–711. 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.10.038
11
BauerM.OostenveldR.PeetersM.FriesP. (2006). Tactile spatial attention enhances gamma-band activity in somatosensory cortex and reduces low-frequency activity in parieto-occipital areas. J. Neurosci. 26, 490–501. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5228-04.2006
12
BosmanC. A.SchoffelenJ.-M.BrunetN.OostenveldR.BastosA. M.WomelsdorfT.et al. (2012). Attentional stimulus selection through selective synchronization between monkey visual areas. Neuron75, 875–888. 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.06.037
13
BraginA.WilsonC. L.AlmajanoJ.ModyI.EngelJ. (2004). High-frequency oscillations after status epilepticus: epileptogenesis and seizure genesis. Epilepsia45, 1017–1023. 10.1111/j.0013-9580.2004.17004.x
14
CanoltyR. T.EdwardsE.DalalS. S.SoltaniM.NagarajanS. S.KirschH. E.et al. (2006). High gamma power is phase-locked to theta oscillations in human neocortex. Science313, 1626–1628. 10.1126/science.1128115
15
ChalkM.HerreroJ. L.GieselmannM. A.DelicatoL. S.GotthardtS.ThieleA. (2010). Attention reduces stimulus-driven gamma frequency oscillations and spike field coherence in V1. Neuron66, 114–125. 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.03.013
16
ChenC. C.KiebelS. J.FristonK. J. (2008). Dynamic causal modelling of induced responses. Neuroimage41, 1293–1312. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.03.026
17
DalalS. S.GuggisbergA. G.EdwardsE.SekiharaK.FindlayA. M.CanoltyR. T.et al. (2008). Five-dimensional neuroimaging: localization of the time-frequency dynamics of cortical activity. Neuroimage40, 1686–1700. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.01.023
18
DavidescoI.HarelM.RamotM.KramerU.KipervasserS.AndelmanF.et al. (2013). Spatial and object-based attention modulates broadband high-frequency responses across the human visual cortical hierarchy. J. Neurosci. 33, 1228–1240. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3181-12.2013
19
De RidderD.ElgoyhenA. B.RomoR.LangguthB. (2011a). Phantom percepts: tinnitus and pain as persisting aversive memory networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108, 8075–8080. 10.1073/pnas.1018466108
20
De RidderD.van der LooE.VannesteS.GaisS.PlazierM.KovacsS.et al. (2011b). Theta-gamma dysrhythmia and auditory phantom perception. J. Neurosurg. 114, 912–921. 10.3171/2010.11.JNS10335
21
DoesburgS. M.IbrahimG. M.SmithM. L.SharmaR.ViljoenA.ChuB.et al. (2013). Altered rolandic gamma-band activation associated with motor impairment and ictal network desynchronization in childhood epilepsy. PLoS ONE8:e54943. 10.1371/journal.pone.0054943
22
EddenR. A. E.MuthukumaraswamyS. D.FreemanT. C. A.SinghK. D. (2009). Orientation discrimination performance is predicted by GABA concentration and gamma oscillation frequency in human primary visual cortex. J. Neurosci. 29, 15721–15726. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4426-09.2009
23
EdwardsE.SoltaniM.DeouellL. Y.BergerM. S.KnightR. T. (2005). High gamma activity in response to deviant auditory stimuli recorded directly from human cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 94, 4269–4280. 10.1152/jn.00324.2005
24
FischL.PrivmanE.RamotM.HarelM.NirY.KipervasserS.AndelmanF.et al. (2009). Neural ‘Ignition’: enhanced activation linked to perceptual awareness in human ventral stream visual cortex. Neuron64, 562–574. 10.1016/j.neuron.2009.11.001
25
FriesP.ReynoldsJ. H.RorieA. E.DesimoneR. (2001). Modulation of oscillatory neuronal synchronization by selective visual attention. Science291, 1560–1563. 10.1126/science.1055465
26
FriesP.SchröderJ.-H.RoelfsemaP. R.SingerW.EngelA. K. (2002). Oscillatory neuronal synchronization in primary visual cortex as a correlate of stimulus selection. J. Neurosci. 22, 3739–3754.
27
FristonK. (2005). A theory of cortical responses. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 360, 815–836. 10.1098/rstb.2005.1622
28
FristonK. (2012). Prediction, perception and agency. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 83, 248–252. 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2011.11.014
29
FristonK.KiebelS. (2009). Predictive coding under the free-energy principle. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 364, 1211–1221. 10.1098/rstb.2008.0300
30
FujiokaT.TrainorL. J.LargeE. W.RossB. (2009). Beta and gamma rhythms in human auditory cortex during musical beat processing. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1169, 89–92. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04779.x
31
GieselmannM. A.ThieleA. (2008). Comparison of spatial integration and surround suppression characteristics in spiking activity and the local field potential in macaque V1. Eur. J. Neurosci. 28, 447–459. 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2008.06358.x
32
GrayC. M.KonigP.EngelA. K.SingerW. (1989). Oscillatory responses in cat visual cortex exhibit inter-columnar synchronization which reflects global stimulus properties. Nature338, 334–338. 10.1038/338334a0
33
GregoriouG. G.GottsS. J.ZhouH.DesimoneR. (2009). High-frequency, long-range coupling between prefrontal and visual cortex during attention. Science324, 1207–1210. 10.1126/science.1171402
34
GriffithsT. D.KumarS.SedleyW.NourskiK. V.KawasakiH.OyaH.et al. (2010). Direct recordings of pitch responses from human auditory cortex. Curr. Biol. 20, 1128–1132. 10.1016/j.cub.2010.04.044
35
GrossJ.SchnitzlerA.TimmermannL.PlonerM. (2007). Gamma oscillations in human primary somatosensory cortex reflect pain perception. PLoS Biol. 5:e133. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0050133
36
GruberT.MüllerM. M.KeilA.ElbertT. (1999). Selective visual-spatial attention alters induced gamma band responses in the human EEG. Clin. Neurophysiol. 110, 2074–2085. 10.1016/S1388-2457(99)00176-5
37
HoogenboomN.SchoffelenJ.-M.OostenveldR.FriesP. (2010). Visually induced gamma-band activity predicts speed of change detection in humans. Neuroimage51, 1162–1167. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.03.041
38
HoogenboomN.SchoffelenJ.-M.OostenveldR.ParkesL. M.FriesP. (2006). Localizing human visual gamma-band activity in frequency, time and space. Neuroimage29, 764–773. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.08.043
39
JacobsJ.ManningJ. R.KahanaM. J. (2010). Response to Miller: ‘Broadband’ vs. ‘High Gamma’ electrocorticographic signals. J. Neurosci. Available online at: http://www.jneurosci.org/content/suppl/2010/05/11/30.19.6477.DC1/6401-09_responseToMiller.pdf
40
JastreboffP. J. (1990). Phantom auditory perception (tinnitus): mechanisms of generation and perception. Neurosci. Res. 8, 221–254. 10.1016/0168-0102(90)90031-9
41
JeanmonodD.MagninM.MorelA. (1996). Low-threshold calcium spike bursts in the human thalamus. common physiopathology for sensory, motor and limbic positive symptoms. Brain119(Pt 2), 363–375. 10.1093/brain/119.2.363
42
JerbiK.OssandónT.HamaméC. M.SenovaS.DalalS. S.JungJ.MinottiL.et al. (2009). Task-related Gamma-band dynamics from an intracerebral perspective: review and implications for surface EEG and MEG. Hum. Brain Mapp. 30, 1758–1771. 10.1002/hbm.20750
43
JiaX.SmithM. A.KohnA. (2011). Stimulus selectivity and spatial coherence of gamma components of the local field potential. J. Neurosci. 31, 9390–9403. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0645-11.2011
44
JiaX.TanabeS.KohnA. (2013). Gamma and the coordination of spiking activity in early visual cortex. Neuron77, 762–774. 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.12.036
45
KahlbrockN.WeiszN. (2008). Transient reduction of tinnitus intensity is marked by concomitant reductions of delta band power. BMC Biol. 6:4. 10.1186/1741-7007-6-4
46
KaltenbachJ. A.GodfreyD. A. (2008). Dorsal cochlear nucleus hyperactivity and tinnitus: are they related?Am. J. Audiol. 17, S148–S161. 10.1044/1059-0889(2008/08-0004)
47
KirschfeldK. (1992). Oscillations in the insect brain: do they correspond to the cortical gamma-waves of vertebrates?Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 89, 4764–4768. 10.1073/pnas.89.10.4764
48
KoelewijnL.RichA. N.MuthukumaraswamyS. D.SinghK. D. (2013). Spatial attention increases high-frequency gamma synchronisation in human medial visual cortex. Neuroimage79, 295–303. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.04.108
49
LachauxJ.-P.GeorgeN.Tallon-BaudryC.MartinerieJ.HuguevilleL.MinottiL.et al. (2005). The many faces of the gamma band response to complex visual stimuli. Neuroimage25, 491–501. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.11.052
50
LlinásR.UrbanoF. J.LeznikE.RamírezR. R.van MarleH. J. F. (2005). Rhythmic and dysrhythmic thalamocortical dynamics: GABA systems and the edge effect. Trends Neurosci. 28, 325–333. 10.1016/j.tins.2005.04.006
51
LlinásR. R.RibaryU.JeanmonodD.KronbergE.MitraP. P. (1999). Thalamocortical dysrhythmia: a neurological and neuropsychiatric syndrome characterized by magnetoencephalography. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 96, 15222–15227. 10.1073/pnas.96.26.15222
52
MacleodK.BaA.LaurentG. (1998). Who reads temporal information contained across synchronized and oscillatory spike trains?Nature395, 693–698. 10.1038/27201
53
MerkerB. (2013). Cortical gamma oscillations: the functional key is activation, not cognition. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 37, 401–417. 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.01.013
54
MillmanR. E.PrendergastG.HymersM.GreenG. G. R. (2013). Representations of the temporal envelope of sounds in human auditory cortex: can the results from invasive intracortical ‘Depth’ electrode recordings be replicated using non-invasive MEG ‘Virtual Electrodes’?Neuroimage64, 185–196. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.09.017
55
MukamelR.GelbardH.ArieliA.HassonU.FriedI.MalachR. (2005). Coupling between neuronal firing, field potentials, and FMRI in human auditory cortex. Science309, 951–954. 10.1126/science.1110913
56
MuthukumaraswamyS. D.EddenR. A. E.JonesD. K.SwettenhamJ. B.SinghK. D. (2009). Resting GABA concentration predicts peak gamma frequency and fMRI amplitude in response to visual stimulation in humans. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106, 8356–8361. 10.1073/pnas.0900728106
57
NazimekJ. M.HunterM. D.WoodruffP. W. R. (2012). Auditory Hallucinations: Expectation-perception Model. Med. Hypotheses78, 802–810. 10.1016/j.mehy.2012.03.014
58
NourskiK. V.RealeR. A.OyaH.KawasakiH.KovachC. K.ChenH.et al. (2009). Temporal envelope of time-compressed speech represented in the human auditory cortex. J. Neurosci. 29, 15564–15574. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3065-09.2009
59
NourskiK. V.SteinschneiderM.OyaH.KawasakiH.JonesR. D.HowardM. A. (2012). Spectral organization of the human lateral superior temporal gyrus revealed by intracranial recordings. Cereb. Cortex. [Epub ahead of print]. 10.1093/cercor/bhs314
60
O'ConnorD. H.FukuiM. M.PinskM. A.KastnerS. (2002). Attention modulates responses in the human lateral geniculate nucleus. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 1203–1209. 10.1038/nn957
61
OrtmannM.MüllerN.SchleeW.WeiszN. (2011). Rapid increases of gamma power in the auditory cortex following noise trauma in humans. Eur. J. Neurosci. 33, 568–575. 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2010.07542.x
62
OsipovaD.TakashimaA.OostenveldR.FernándezG.MarisE.JensenO. (2006). Theta and gamma oscillations predict encoding and retrieval of declarative memory. J. Neurosci. 26, 7523–7531. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1948-06.2006
63
ParraJ.KalitzinS. N.IriarteJ.BlanesW.VelisD. N.Lopes da SilvaF. H. (2003). Gamma-band phase clustering and photosensitivity: is there an underlying mechanism common to photosensitive epilepsy and visual perception?Brain126, 1164–1172. 10.1093/brain/awg109
64
PerryG.HamandiK.BrindleyL. M.MuthukumaraswamyS. D.SinghK. D. (2013). The properties of induced gamma oscillations in human visual cortex show individual variability in their dependence on stimulus size. Neuroimage68, 83–92. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.11.043
65
PockettS.HolmesM. D. (2009). Intracranial EEG power spectra and phase synchrony during consciousness and unconsciousness. Conscious. Cogn. 18, 1049–1055. 10.1016/j.concog.2009.08.010
66
PrivmanE.FischL.NeufeldM. Y.KramerU.KipervasserS.AndelmanF.et al. (2011). Antagonistic relationship between gamma power and visual evoked potentials revealed in human visual cortex. Cereb. Cortex21, 616–624. 10.1093/cercor/bhq128
67
ProulxM. J.EgethH. E. (2008). Biased competition and visual search: the role of luminance and size contrast. Psychol. Res. 72, 106–113. 10.1007/s00426-006-0077-z
68
RayS.MaunsellJ. H. R. (2011). Different origins of gamma rhythm and high-gamma activity in macaque visual cortex. PLoS Biol. 9:e1000610. 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000610
69
RayS.NieburE.HsiaoS. S.SinaiA.CroneN. E. (2008). High-frequency gamma activity (80–150 Hz) is increased in human cortex during selective attention. Clin. Neurophysiol. 119, 116–133. 10.1016/j.clinph.2007.09.136
70
RobertsM. J.LowetE.BrunetN. M.Ter WalM.TiesingaP.FriesP.et al. (2013). Robust gamma coherence between macaque V1 and V2 by dynamic frequency matching. Neuron78, 523–536. 10.1016/j.neuron.2013.03.003
71
SchaetteR.McAlpineD. (2011). Tinnitus with a normal audiogram: physiological evidence for hidden hearing loss and computational model. J. Neurosci. 31, 13452–13457. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2156-11.2011
72
ScheeringaR.FriesP.PeterssonK.-M.OostenveldR.GrotheI.NorrisD. G.et al. (2011). Neuronal dynamics underlying high- and low-frequency EEG oscillations contribute independently to the human BOLD signal. Neuron69, 572–583. 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.11.044
73
Scheffer-TeixeiraR.BelchiorH.LeãoR. N.RibeiroS.TortA. B. L. (2013). On high-frequency field oscillations (>100 Hz) and the spectral leakage of spiking activity. J. Neurosci. 33, 1535–1539. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4217-12.2013
74
SchurgerA.CoweyA.Tallon-BaudryC. (2006). Induced gamma-band oscillations correlate with awareness in hemianopic patient GY. Neuropsychologia44, 1796–1803. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.03.015
75
SedleyW.TekiS.KumarS.BarnesG. R.BamiouD.-E.GriffithsT. D. (2012). Single-subject oscillatory γ responses in tinnitus. Brain135(Pt 10), 3089–3100. 10.1093/brain/aws220
76
SedleyW.TekiS.KumarS.OverathT.BarnesG. R.GriffithsT. D. (2012). Gamma band pitch responses in human auditory cortex measured with magnetoencephalography. Neuroimage59, 1904–1911. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.08.098
77
SingerW.GrayC. M. (1995). Visual feature integration and the temporal correlation hypothesis. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 18, 555–586. 10.1146/annurev.ne.18.030195.003011
78
SokolovA.PavlovaM.LutzenbergerW.BirbaumerN. (2004). Reciprocal modulation of neuromagnetic induced gamma activity by attention in the human visual and auditory cortex. Neuroimage22, 521–529. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.01.045
79
SteinschneiderM.FishmanY. I.ArezzoJ. C. (2008). Spectrotemporal analysis of evoked and induced electroencephalographic responses in primary auditory cortex (A1) of the awake monkey. Cereb. Cortex18, 610–625. 10.1093/cercor/bhm094
80
SwettenhamJ. B.MuthukumaraswamyS. D.SinghK. D. (2009). Spectral properties of induced and evoked gamma oscillations in human early visual cortex to moving and stationary stimuli. J. Neurophysiol. 102, 1241–1253. 10.1152/jn.91044.2008
81
SwettenhamJ. B.MuthukumaraswamyS. D.SinghK. D. (2013). BOLD responses in human primary visual cortex are insensitive to substantial changes in neural activity. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7:76. 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00076
82
TadinD.LappinJ. S.GilroyL. A.BlakeR. (2003). Perceptual consequences of centre – surround antagonism in visual motion processing. Nature424, 312–315. 10.1038/nature01800
83
Tallon-BaudryC.BertrandO.HénaffM.-A.IsnardJ.FischerC. (2005). Attention modulates gamma-band oscillations differently in the human lateral occipital cortex and fusiform gyrus. Cereb. Cortex15, 654–662. 10.1093/cercor/bhh167
84
TassP. A.AdamchicI.FreundH.-J.von StackelbergT.HauptmannC. (2012). Counteracting tinnitus by acoustic coordinated reset neuromodulation. Restor. Neurol. Neurosci. 30, 137–159.
85
TiesingaP. H.FellousJ.-M.SalinasE.JoséJ. V.SejnowskiT. J. (2004). Inhibitory synchrony as a mechanism for attentional gain modulation. J. Physiol. Paris98, 296–314. 10.1016/j.jphysparis.2005.09.002
86
TraubR. D.PaisI.BibbigA.LebeauF. E. N.BuhlE. H.GarnerH.et al. (2005). Transient depression of excitatory synapses on interneurons contributes to epileptiform bursts during gamma oscillations in the mouse hippocampal slice. J. Neurophysiol. 94, 1225–1235. 10.1152/jn.00069.2005
87
TraubR. D.WhittingtonM. A.BuhlE. H.LeBeauF. E.BibbigA.BoydS.et al. (2001). A possible role for gap junctions in generation of very fast EEG oscillations preceding the onset of, and perhaps initiating, seizures. Epilepsia42, 153–170.
88
van der LooE.GaisS.CongedoM.VannesteS.PlazierM.MenovskyT.et al. (2009). Tinnitus intensity dependent gamma oscillations of the contralateral auditory cortex. PLoS ONE4:e7396. 10.1371/journal.pone.0007396
89
van PeltS.BoomsmaD. I.FriesP. (2012). Magnetoencephalography in twins reveals a strong genetic determination of the peak frequency of visually induced Γ-band synchronization. J. Neurosci. 32, 3388–3392. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5592-11.2012
90
van PeltS.FriesP. (2013). Visual stimulus eccentricity affects human gamma peak frequency. Neuroimage78C, 439–447. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.04.040
91
Van WijkB. C. M.LitvakV.FristonK. J.DaffertshoferA. (2013). Nonlinear coupling between occipital and motor cortex during motor imagery: a dynamic causal modeling study. Neuroimage71, 104–113. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.12.076
92
VannesteS.van DongenM.de VreeB.HiseniS.van der VeldenE.StrydisC.et al. (2013). Does enriched acoustic environment in humans abolish chronic tinnitus clinically and electrophysiologically? a double blind placebo controlled study. Hear. Res. 296, 141–148. 10.1016/j.heares.2012.10.003
93
VisaniE.VarottoG.BinelliS.FratelloL.FranceschettiS.AvanziniG.et al. (2010). Photosensitive epilepsy: spectral and coherence analyses of EEG using 14Hz intermittent photic stimulation. Clin. Neurophysiol. 121, 318–324. 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.12.003
94
WeinbergerN. M.MiasnikovA. A.ChenJ. C. (2006). The level of cholinergic nucleus basalis activation controls the specificity of auditory associative memory. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 86, 270–285. 10.1016/j.nlm.2006.04.004
95
WeiszN.HartmannT.DohrmannK.SchleeW.NorenaA. (2006). High-frequency tinnitus without hearing loss does not mean absence of deafferentation. Hear. Res. 222, 108–114. 10.1016/j.heares.2006.09.003
96
WeiszN.MüllerS.SchleeW.DohrmannK.HartmannT.ElbertT. (2007). The neural code of auditory phantom perception. J. Neurosci. 27, 1479–1484. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3711-06.2007
97
WhittingtonM. A.CunninghamM. O.LeBeauF. E. N.RaccaC.TraubR. D. (2011). Multiple origins of the cortical γ rhythm. Dev. Neurobiol. 71, 92–106. 10.1002/dneu.20814
98
WhittingtonM. A.TraubR. D.JefferysJ. G. R. (1995). Synchronized oscillations in interneuron networks driven by metabotropic glutamate receptor activation. Nature373, 612–615. 10.1038/373612a0
99
WomelsdorfT.FriesP.MitraP. P.DesimoneR. (2006). Gamma-band synchronization in visual cortex predicts speed of change detection. Nature439, 733–736. 10.1038/nature04258
100
WyartV.Tallon-BaudryC. (2008). Neural dissociation between visual awareness and spatial attention. J. Neurosci. 28, 2667–2679. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4748-07.2008
101
Yuval-GreenbergS.TomerO.KerenA. S.NelkenI.DeouellL. Y. (2008). Transient induced gamma-band response in EEG as a manifestation of miniature saccades. Neuron58, 429–441. 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.03.027
Summary
Keywords
gamma oscillations, magnetoencephalography, electroencephalography, perception, inhibition, tinnitus, epilepsy
Citation
Sedley W and Cunningham MO (2013) Do cortical gamma oscillations promote or suppress perception? An under-asked question with an over-assumed answer. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7:595. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00595
Received
15 April 2013
Accepted
03 September 2013
Published
20 September 2013
Volume
7 - 2013
Edited by
Krish Singh, Cardiff University, UK
Reviewed by
Krish Singh, Cardiff University, UK; Nathan Weisz, University of Trento, Italy; Nienke Hoogenboom, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Germany
Copyright
© 2013 Sedley and Cunningham.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: William Sedley, Auditory Group, Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University Medical School, Framlington Place, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK e-mail: willsedley@gmail.com
This article was submitted to the journal Frontiers in Human Neuroscience.
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.