Genome sequencing for rightward hemispheric language dominance

Most people have left-hemisphere dominance for various aspects of language processing, but only roughly 1% of the adult population has atypically reversed, rightward hemispheric language dominance (RHLD). The genetic-developmental program that underlies leftward language laterality is unknown, as are the causes of atypical variation. We performed an exploratory whole-genome-sequencing study, with the hypothesis that strongly penetrant, rare genetic mutations might sometimes be involved in RHLD. This was by analogy with situs inversus of the visceral organs (left-right mirror reversal of the heart, lungs and so on), which is sometimes due to monogenic mutations. The genomes of 33 subjects with RHLD were sequenced and analyzed with reference to large population-genetic data sets, as well as 34 subjects (14 left-handed) with typical language laterality. The sample was powered to detect rare, highly penetrant, monogenic effects if they would be present in at least 10 of the 33 RHLD cases and no controls, but no individual genes had mutations in more than five RHLD cases while being un-mutated in controls. A hypothesis derived from invertebrate mechanisms of left-right axis formation led to the detection of an increased mutation load, in RHLD subjects, within genes involved with the actin cytoskeleton. The latter finding offers a first, tentative insight into molecular genetic influences on hemispheric language dominance.

The relationship between behavioral language laterality, face laterality and language performance in left-handers

Left-handers provide unique information about the relationship between cognitive functions because of their larger variability in hemispheric dominance. This study presents the laterality distribution of, correlations between and test-retest reliability of behavioral lateralized language tasks (speech production, reading and speech perception), face recognition tasks, handedness measures and language performance tests based on data from 98 left-handers. The results show that a behavioral test battery leads to percentages of (a)typical dominance that are similar to those found in neuropsychological studies even though the incidence of clear atypical lateralization (about 20%) may be overestimated at the group level. Significant correlations were found between the language tasks for both reaction time and accuracy lateralization indices. The degree of language laterality could however not be linked to face laterality, handedness or language performance. Finally, individuals were classified less consistently than expected as being typical, bilateral or atypical across all tasks. This may be due to the often good (speech production and perception tasks) but sometimes weak (reading and face tasks) test-retest reliabilities. The lack of highly reliable and valid test protocols for functions unrelated to speech remains one of the largest impediments for individual analysis and cross-task investigations in laterality research.

Brain Functional Organization Associated With Language Lateralization

Although it is well-established that human language functions are mostly lateralized to the left hemisphere of the brain, little is known about the functional mechanisms underlying such hemispheric dominance. The present study investigated intrinsic organization of the whole brain at rest, by means of functional connectivity and graph theoretical analysis, with the aim to characterize brain functional organization underlying typical and atypical language dominance. We included healthy left-handers, both those with typical left-lateralized language and those with atypical right-lateralized language. Results show that 1) differences between typical and atypical language lateralization are associated with functional connectivity within the language system, particularly with weakened connectivity between left inferior frontal gyrus and several other language-related areas; and 2) for participants with atypical language dominance, the degree of lateralization is linked with multiple functional connectivities and graph theoretical metrics of whole brain organization, including local efficiency and small-worldness. This is the first study, to our knowledge, that linked the degree of language lateralization to global topology of brain networks. These results reveal that typical and atypical language dominance mainly differ in functional connectivity within the language system, and that atypical language dominance is associated with whole-brain organization.

Laterality and unilateral deafness: Patients with congenital right ear deafness do not develop atypical language dominance

Auditory speech perception, speech production and reading lateralize to the left hemisphere in the majority of healthy right-handers. In this study, we investigated to what extent sensory input underlies the side of language dominance. We measured the lateralization of the three core subprocesses of language in patients who had profound hearing loss in the right ear from birth and in matched control subjects. They took part in a semantic decision listening task involving speech and sound stimuli (auditory perception), a word generation task (speech production) and a passive reading task (reading). The results show that a lack of sensory auditory input on the right side, which is strongly connected to the contralateral left hemisphere, does not lead to atypical lateralization of speech perception. Speech production and reading were also typically left lateralized in all but one patient, contradicting previous small scale studies. Other factors such as genetic constraints presumably overrule the role of sensory input in the development of (a)typical language lateralization.

What can atypical language hemispheric specialization tell us about cognitive functions?

Recent studies have made substantial progress in understanding the interactions between cognitive functions, from language to cognitive control, attention, and memory. However, dissociating these functions has been hampered by the close proximity of regions involved, as in the case in the prefrontal and parietal cortex. In this article, we review a series of studies that investigated the relationship between language and other cognitive functions in an alternative way - by examining their functional (co-)lateralization. We argue that research on the hemispheric lateralization of language and its link with handedness can offer an appropriate starting-point to shed light on the relationships between different functions. Besides functional interactions, anatomical asymmetries in non-human primates and those underlying language in humans can provide unique information about cortical organization. Finally, some open questions and criteria are raised for an ideal theoretical model of the cortex based on hemispheric specialization.

A surface-based analysis of language lateralization and cortical asymmetry

Among brain functions, language is one of the most lateralized. Cortical language areas are also some of the most asymmetrical in the brain. An open question is whether the asymmetry in function is linked to the asymmetry in anatomy. To address this question, we measured anatomical asymmetry in 34 participants shown with fMRI to have language dominance of the left hemisphere (LLD) and 21 participants shown to have atypical right hemisphere dominance (RLD). All participants were healthy and left-handed, and most (80%) were female. Gray matter (GM) volume asymmetry was measured using an automated surface-based technique in both ROIs and exploratory analyses. In the ROI analysis, a significant difference between LLD and RLD was found in the insula. No differences were found in planum temporale (PT), pars opercularis (POp), pars triangularis (PTr), or Heschl's gyrus (HG). The PT, POp, insula, and HG were all significantly left lateralized in both LLD and RLD participants. Both the positive and negative ROI findings replicate a previous study using manually labeled ROIs in a different cohort [Keller, S. S., Roberts, N., Garcia-Finana, M., Mohammadi, S., Ringelstein, E. B., Knecht, S., et al. Can the language-dominant hemisphere be predicted by brain anatomy? Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 2013-2029, 2011]. The exploratory analysis was accomplished using a new surface-based registration that aligns cortical folding patterns across both subject and hemisphere. A small but significant cluster was found in the superior temporal gyrus that overlapped with the PT. A cluster was also found in the ventral occipitotemporal cortex corresponding to the visual word recognition area. The surface-based analysis also makes it possible to disentangle the effects of GM volume, thickness, and surface area while removing the effects of curvature. For both the ROI and exploratory analyses, the difference between LLD and RLD volume laterality was most strongly driven by differences in surface area and not cortical thickness. Overall, there were surprisingly few differences in GM volume asymmetry between LLD and RLD indicating that gross morphometric asymmetry is only subtly related to functional language laterality.

Interhemispheric communication influences reading behavior

We can read words at an amazing speed, with the left hemisphere taking the burden of the processing in most readers (i.e., over 95% of right-handers and about 75% of left-handers). Yet, it is a long-standing question whether word reading in central vision is possible without information transfer between the left and right hemispheres (LH/RH). Here we show that such communication is required by comparing word naming latencies and eye movement data of people with LH language dominance and a unique sample of healthy RH dominant people. The results reveal that individuals with LH speech dominance name words faster when they are allowed to fixate at the word beginning, whereas RH dominants are faster for fixations toward the end. In text reading, the eyes of LH dominants land more to the left than the eyes of RH dominants, making more information directly available to the dominant hemisphere. We conclude that the traditional view of bilateral projections in central vision is incorrect. In contrast, interhemispheric communication is needed in central vision, and eye movements are adjusted to optimize information uptake. Our findings therefore call into question the explanation of macular sparing in hemianopia based on a bilaterally projecting fovea. In addition, these results are in line with the increase of white matter in the splenium of the corpus callosum when people learn to read.

Colateralization of Broca's area and the visual word form area in left-handers: fMRI evidence

Language production has been found to be lateralized in the left hemisphere (LH) for 95% of right-handed people and about 75% of left-handers. The prevalence of atypical right hemispheric (RH) or bilateral lateralization for reading and colateralization of production with word reading laterality has never been tested in a large sample. In this study, we scanned 57 left-handers who had previously been identified as being clearly left (N=30), bilateral (N=7) or clearly right (N=20) dominant for speech on the basis of fMRI activity in the inferior frontal gyrus (pars opercularis/pars triangularis) during a silent word generation task. They were asked to perform a lexical decision task, in which words were contrasted against checkerboards, to test the lateralization of reading in the ventral occipitotemporal region. Lateralization indices for both tasks correlated significantly (r=0.59). The majority of subjects showed most activity during lexical decision in the hemisphere that was identified as their word production dominant hemisphere. However, more than half of the sample (N=31) had bilateral activity for the lexical decision task without a clear dominant role for either the LH or RH, and three showed a crossed frontotemporal lateralization pattern. These findings have consequences for neurobiological models relating phonological and orthographic processes, and for lateralization measurements for clinical purposes.

The mechanisms underlying the interhemispheric integration of information in foveal word recognition: evidence for transcortical inhibition

Words are processed as units. This is not as evident as it seems, given the division of the human cerebral cortex in two hemispheres and the partial decussation of the optic tract. In two experiments, we investigated what underlies the unity of foveally presented words: A bilateral projection of visual input in foveal vision, or interhemispheric inhibition and integration as proposed by the SERIOL model of visual word recognition. Experiment 1 made use of pairs of words and nonwords with a length of four letters each. Participants had to name the word and ignore the nonword. The visual field in which the word was presented and the distance between the word and the nonword were manipulated. The results showed that the typical right visual field advantage was observed only when the word and the nonword were clearly separated. When the distance between them became smaller, the right visual field advantage turned into a left visual field advantage, in line with the interhemispheric inhibition mechanism postulated by the SERIOL model. Experiment 2, using 5-letters stimuli, confirmed that this result was not due to the eccentricity of the word relative to the fixation location but to the distance between the word and the nonword.

How does interhemispheric communication in visual word recognition work? Deciding between early and late integration accounts of the split fovea theory

It has recently been shown that interhemispheric communication is needed for the processing of foveally presented words. In this study, we examine whether the integration of information happens at an early stage, before word recognition proper starts, or whether the integration is part of the recognition process itself. Two lexical decision experiments are reported in which words were presented at different fixation positions. In Experiment 1, a masked form priming task was used with primes that had two adjacent letters transposed. The results showed that although the fixation position had a substantial influence on the transposed letter priming effect, the priming was not smaller when the transposed letters were sent to different hemispheres than when they were projected to the same hemisphere. In Experiment 2, stimuli were presented that either had high frequency hemifield competitors or could be identified unambiguously on the basis of the information in one hemifield. Again, the lexical decision times did not vary as a function of hemifield competitors. These results are consistent with the early integration account, as presented in the SERIOL model of visual word recognition.