Deployment of spatial attention towards locations in memory representations: an EEG study

Recalling information from visual short-term memory (VSTM) involves the same neural mechanisms as attending to an actually perceived scene. In particular, retrieval from VSTM has been associated with orienting of visual attention towards a location within a spatially-organized memory representation. However, an open question concerns whether spatial attention is also recruited during VSTM retrieval even when performing the task does not require access to spatial coordinates of items in the memorized scene. The present study combined a visual search task with a modified, delayed central probe protocol, together with EEG analysis, to answer this question. We found a temporal contralateral negativity (TCN) elicited by a centrally presented go-signal which was spatially uninformative and featurally unrelated to the search target and informed participants only about a response key that they had to press to indicate a prepared target-present vs. -absent decision. This lateralization during VSTM retrieval (TCN) provides strong evidence of a shift of attention towards the target location in the memory representation, which occurred despite the fact that the present task required no spatial (or featural) information from the search to be encoded, maintained, and retrieved to produce the correct response and that the go-signal did not itself specify any information relating to the location and defining feature of the target

Electrophysiological evidence of multitasking impairment of attentional deployment reflects target-specific processing, not distractor inhibition

We studied the interaction between the control mechanisms subserving spatial attention and central attention using the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm. Two stimuli, a pure tone (T1) and a circular visual array (T2), including a salient target and a salient distractor, were presented at varying stimulus onset asynchronies, each requiring a speeded response. Target-specific and distractor-specific lateralized event-related potentials were isolated by placing one of them at a lateral position and the other on the vertical midline. As SOA was decreased, a progressive reduction and postponement of a T2-locked N2pc component was observed with a lateral target and a central distractor. No lateralized potentials were associated with a lateral distractor and a central target. The sustained posterior contralateral negativity (SPCN) was observed independently of SOA modulation, only with a lateral target. We also observed an earlier positive deflection, the Ppc (positivity posterior contralateral), that was contralateral to both lateral targets and distractors, whose amplitude and latency were not affected by SOA variations. We conclude that central processing interferes specifically with target processing reflected by the N2pc and SPCN. We propose that the Ppc reflects an initial, bottom-up response to the presence of a salient stimulus, whereas the N2pc and SPCN reflect the controlled deployment of spatial attention to targets and maintenance of target information in visual short-term memory, respectively. © 2012 Elsevier B.V

PD components and distractor inhibition in visual search: new evidence for the Signal Suppression Hypothesis

The hypothesis that salient distractors in visual search are actively suppressed is supported by the fact that these objects elicit PD components believed to be associated with inhibition. This account was challenged by Kerzel and Burra (2020), who found that a PD to lateral colour singleton distractors was followed by a contralateral negativity, which they interpreted as an N2pc indicative of attentional capture. As this would be at odds with successful distractor suppression, they proposed an alternative lateral-first serial scanning hypothesis, which assumes that the PD might actually be an N2pc elicited when a lateral context item is selected. We tested this hypothesis by measuring lateralized ERP components to search displays with two lateral and two vertical midline items, including a colour singleton and a shape-defined target. Colour singletons triggered PD components not only in blocks where attention was unfocused because target location was unpredictable, but critically also in blocks where targets only appeared on the midline and participants had no reason to attend to lateral items. This is inconsistent with the serial scanning hypothesis and supports the idea that the PD reflects signal suppression. PD components to singleton distractors were followed by a contralateral negativity, which we interpreted as a second PD elicited by non-salient distractors on the opposite side. Our sequential inhibition account reconciles conflicting results of recent studies and emphasizes the role of inhibitory processes during attentional target selection in visual search

M-Cadherin Activates Rac1 GTPase through the Rho-GEF Trio during Myoblast Fusion

Cadherins are transmembrane glycoproteins that mediate Ca(2+)-dependent homophilic cell–cell adhesion and play crucial role during skeletal myogenesis. M-cadherin is required for myoblast fusion into myotubes, but its mechanisms of action remain unknown. The goal of this study was to cast some light on the nature of the M-cadherin–mediated signals involved in myoblast fusion into myotubes. We found that the Rac1 GTPase activity is increased at the time of myoblast fusion and it is required for this process. Moreover, we showed that M-cadherin–dependent adhesion activates Rac1 and demonstrated the formation of a multiproteic complex containing M-cadherin, the Rho-GEF Trio, and Rac1 at the onset of myoblast fusion. Interestingly, Trio knockdown efficiently blocked both the increase in Rac1-GTP levels, observed after M-cadherin–dependent contact formation, and myoblast fusion. We conclude that M-cadherin–dependent adhesion can activate Rac1 via the Rho-GEF Trio at the time of myoblast fusion