Brodmann Areas (BA), 10-20 Sites, Primary Functions
ADD
Centre, Biofeedback Institute of Toronto, American
Applied NeuroScience Institute
Michael Thompson, MD, James Thompson, PhD., Wu
Wenqing, MD.
What follows is a project-in-process. It is being
done to assist the staff at our centers in their
work using EEG Biofeedback (neurofeedback). It is
to be a part of
The Companion to The Neurofeedback
Book
which is being written at this time. If it can be a
helpful starting point for others, then they are
welcome to use it. Each BA has many different
functions associated with it. We have attempted to
list one or two commonly mentioned functions for
each site with no attempt to mention them all. To
be inclusive would have defeated the purpose of
this summary, which was to give our staff
rudimentary information relating Brodmann Areas to
different 10-20 sites.
Functions for each Brodmann area are outlined
below. This preliminary document represents a best
guess based on our clinical observations and on the
work published (or unpublished) by others. We must
start somewhere, however, the detail of functions
for each Brodmann area is necessarily FALSE. Why?
Because all functions are a result of the
interaction of many areas. As Dan Lloyd of Trinity
College, Hartford, CT, so succinctly put it, “The
typical BA is differentially engaged in 40% of
behavioral (cognitive, perceptual, emotive)
domains” (Lloyd, 2007). This is one reason why
coherence and phase training may become
increasingly important in EEG Biofeedback.
NOTE: Please do not get confused. A Brodmann area
does not (necessarily) correspond precisely to a
named gyrus on the cortex. In the following we have
tried to give as close a correspondence as
possible. We have given the closest approximation
of 10-20 sites to the Brodmann areas as we could.
Please e-mail to us your suggestions for
corrections; they are appreciated.
addcentre@gmail.com
Thank you.
Dr. Thompson, ADD Centre & The Biofeedback
Institute, Canada; Dr. Wu Wenqing, Friendship
Hospital & Capital Medical University of
Beijing and Dr. James Thompson AANI, New York, USA
have made this attempt to simplify and put in
summary form the work of many others. Special
thanks are extended to Mark Dubin, Dan Lloyd,
Richard Soutar, Bob Thatcher, Johnathan
Walker,
and many others who have given us their summaries
or whose work is available on the internet. These
persons are mentioned because they were consulted
or used as primary references. All have spent
considerable time compiling data on this
subject.
Note:
A dash between sites, (F3-C3) means ‘between these
two sites’. The following short forms are also
used: Mirror Neuron System(MNS); left hand
side(LHS), right hand side(RHS), Brodmann Area(BA);
and (?) means we don’t have a reference. Figures
are adapted from
The Neurofeedback Book.
(Original illustrations by Amanda Reeves with
colouring and numbering of areas by Bojana
Knezevic)
Central Sites – Mid-Sagittal View
In the
following, some central sites are reflected on the
surface EEG at FPz, Fz, Cz, Pz, Oz. To a small
extent there may be some reflection of the central
sites at F7, F8; T7, T8; P7, P8.However, for more
precise work practitioners in the future may use
LORETA neurofeedback.
Note: Autonomic Nervous System (ANS), Electromyogram (EMG)
i. In conduction aphasia a client may be able to understand and have good comprehension but may be unable to repeat what they have just read or heard. In these circumstances there could be a lesion in the arcuate fasiculus between Wernicke’s area in the temporal parietal junction and Broca’s area in the frontal lobe. The client would exhibit dyslexia. In the QEEG (19 channel) it is possible that one would observe hypo-coherence between F7 and P7 (also possibly P3). Coherence training should improve the dyslexic symptoms.
ii. In another type of learning problem, referred to as a non-verbal learning disability, one might observe hyper-coherence between areas in the parietal lobe (more on the right side) and hypo-coherence between the parietal areas and the left temporal lobe. In our experience it is reasonable to expect symptom improvement with neurofeedback training to correct the coherence problems.
Note: As a general rule-of-thumb, both in amplitude training and in coherence training, it may not be the frequency or even the direction, too much or too little, compared to the data base, that is the main key to understanding what is occurring. The most significant key to understanding what is malfunctioning is the function of the areas that are > + or – 2SD compared to the normal data base.
Selected References: (We extend thanks to the many people who so kindly guided us in putting together this summary. Their generosity is greatly appreciated. Only a few could be referenced below)
- Dubin, Mark Brodmann Areas in the Human Brain with an emphasis on vision and language. University of Colorado www.spot.colorado.edu/~dubin/talks/Brodmann/Brodmann.html
- Lloyd, Dan, 2007, What do Brodmann areas do? Or: Scanning the Neurocracy. Program in Neuroscience, Trinity College, Hartford, CT 06106 (dan.lloyd [at] trincoll.edu) Personal Communication, Dr. Lloyd notes that this is a work-in-progress. (This work is well researched and very detailed.)
- Neuroguide Delux, 2.3.7, (2007). Robert Thatcher, Applied Neuroscience Inc. (www.appliedneuroscience.com)
- Richard Soutar, Ph.D., 2000, New MindNeurofeedback Center Personal Communication
- Thompson, M. & Thompson, L. (2003) The Neurofeedback Book: An Introduction to Basic Concepts in Applied Psychophysiology, Wheat Ridge, CO: Association for Applied Psychophysiology.
- Walker, J. Kolzlowski, G. Lawson, R., A modular activation/coherence approach to evaluating clinical/QEEG correlations and for guiding neurofeedback training: modular insufficiencies, modular excesses, disconnections, and hyperconnections. Journal of Neurotherapy, vol.11,(1) 25-44
At a nominal cost with all proceeds being donated to the isnr research fund.