[FieldTrip] oscillations in the intracranial vs. EEG/MEG

[Arjen Stolk]

Hi Daniel,

There are also empirical arguments for agreement in rhythm properties
between the recording modalities. For instance, compare the sensorimotor
alpha and beta dynamics shown in Figure 3C and D of this MEG study
<https://www.jneurosci.org/content/34/44/14783.long>with the dynamics shown
in Figure 2E of the related ECoG study
<https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2019/07/26/636241.full.pdf>.
The temporal dynamics are highly consistent across the two modalities,
though the ECoG recordings obviously allowed for a preciser anatomical
characterization.

Hope this helps, best of luck with the revisions,
Arjen

On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 2:07 PM Christos Papadelis <
Christos.Papadelis at cookchildrens.org> wrote:

> From a signal processing point of view, there are both signals....
>
> Christos
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 1, 2019, at 6:09 AM, Daniel Sodan <daniel.sodan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> *EXTERNAL EMAIL – Use caution with any links or file attachments.*
>
> Dear list,
>
> My question is not directly fieldtrip related, but I think that this might
> be a relevant forum:
> I was told by a paper reviewer that the literature treat oscillations in
> the intracranial (e.g., human ECoG) vs. EEG/MEG data differently.
> Consequently, discussing the literature of the EEG in the context of the
> intracranial results is not too relevant.  I would say that the two main
> differences between two types of data: a) low sensitivity to high
> frequencies in the EEG/MEG; b) low spatial specificity in the EEG/MEG. But
> apart from that,  why these two types of data are or should be treated
> differently? If someone has relevant references on this theme, I will
> appreciate.
>
> Thanks,
> Daniel
>
> _______________________________________________
> fieldtrip mailing list
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailman.science.ru.nl_mailman_listinfo_fieldtrip&d=DwIGaQ&c=fHUKEfYp8ZKZp-Z4zyr9bVWzIvkODZPO4N8qkwj6HVY&r=7SbC5dxnPau5yltY2QplNc-vztlJxcy9CY1sPv7zBkVXWSzBQiTQV7EfhGEB9MEp&m=K5quo6WtEFmNDsZ_ariu1vbi_gC_3kM_w7ee-dTH6pM&s=_ZbHWZyXYAsyADXeexaXrPBe62S9DT0Eg7zZVaihHOA&e=
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__doi.org_10.1371_journal.pcbi.1002202&d=DwIGaQ&c=fHUKEfYp8ZKZp-Z4zyr9bVWzIvkODZPO4N8qkwj6HVY&r=7SbC5dxnPau5yltY2QplNc-vztlJxcy9CY1sPv7zBkVXWSzBQiTQV7EfhGEB9MEp&m=K5quo6WtEFmNDsZ_ariu1vbi_gC_3kM_w7ee-dTH6pM&s=1ff1oVb2sFmWtct0tpyFX79p6FIzVNxo4bDdYeSJ_24&e=
>
> _______________________________________________
> fieldtrip mailing list
> https://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip
> https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002202
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20191001/c53a3438/attachment.html>