Evidence for the late MMN as a neurophysiological endophenotype for dyslexia

Nina Neuhoff, Jennifer Bruder, Jürgen Bartling, Andreas Warnke, Helmut Remschmidt, Bertram Müller-Myhsok, Gerd Schulte-Körne, Nina Neuhoff, Jennifer Bruder, Jürgen Bartling, Andreas Warnke, Helmut Remschmidt, Bertram Müller-Myhsok, Gerd Schulte-Körne

Abstract

Dyslexia affects 5-10% of school-aged children and is therefore one of the most common learning disorders. Research on auditory event related potentials (AERP), particularly the mismatch negativity (MMN) component, has revealed anomalies in individuals with dyslexia to speech stimuli. Furthermore, candidate genes for this disorder were found through molecular genetic studies. A current challenge for dyslexia research is to understand the interaction between molecular genetics and brain function, and to promote the identification of relevant endophenotypes for dyslexia. The present study examines MMN, a neurophysiological correlate of speech perception, and its potential as an endophenotype for dyslexia in three groups of children. The first group of children was clinically diagnosed with dyslexia, whereas the second group of children was comprised of their siblings who had average reading and spelling skills and were therefore "unaffected" despite having a genetic risk for dyslexia. The third group consisted of control children who were not related to the other groups and were also unaffected. In total, 225 children were included in the study. All children showed clear MMN activity to/da/-/ba/contrasts that could be separated into three distinct MMN components. Whilst the first two MMN components did not differentiate the groups, the late MMN component (300-700 ms) revealed significant group differences. The mean area of the late MMN was attenuated in both the dyslexic children and their unaffected siblings in comparison to the control children. This finding is indicative of analogous alterations of neurophysiological processes in children with dyslexia and those with a genetic risk for dyslexia, without a manifestation of the disorder. The present results therefore further suggest that the late MMN might be a potential endophenotype for dyslexia.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1. MMN1, MMN2, and late MMN…
Figure 1. MMN1, MMN2, and late MMN for all 3 groups.
MMN1, MMN2, and late MMN for dyslexic children (black line), unaffected siblings (dashed line), and unrelated controls (dotted line) at the nine fronto-central electrodes, giving the timeframes for the MMN1 (84–188 ms), MMN2 (188–300 ms), and late MMN (300–700 ms).
Figure 2. Topographic maps for the late…
Figure 2. Topographic maps for the late MMN.
Topographic maps for the time period 300–700 ms (late MMN) for dyslexic children, unaffected siblings, and unrelated controls, showing the ROI encircled in red.

References

    1. Dilling H, Mombour W, Schmidt MH, Schulte-Markwort E. Weltgesundheitsorganisation. Bern: Verlag Hans Huber; 1994. Internationale Klassifikation psychischer Störungen - ICD-10 Kapitel V (F)/Forschungskriterien.
    1. Shaywitz SE, Shaywitz BA, Fletcher JM, Escobar MD. Prevalence of reading disability in boys and girls. Results of the Connecticut Longitudinal Study. The Journal of the American Medical Association. 1990;264:998–1002.
    1. Katusic SK, Colligan RC, Barbaresi WJ, Schaid DJ, Jacobsen SJ. Incidence of reading disability in a population-based birth cohort, 1976–1982, Rochester, Minn. Mayo Clin Proc. 2001;76:1081–1092.
    1. Schulte-Korne G, Bruder J. Clinical neurophysiology of visual and auditory processing in dyslexia: a review. Clin Neurophysiol. 2010;121:1794–1809.
    1. Bishop DV. Using mismatch negativity to study central auditory processing in developmental language and literacy impairments: where are we, and where should we be going? Psychological bulletin. 2007;133:651–672.
    1. Naatanen R, Paavilainen P, Rinne T, Alho K. Clinical Neurophysiology; 2007. The mismatch negativity (MMN) in basic research of central auditory processing: A review.
    1. Tiitinen H, May P, Reinikainen K, Naatanen R. Attentive novelty detection in humans is governed by pre-attentive sensory memory. Nature. 1994;372:90–92.
    1. Naatanen R. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1992. Attention and Brain Function.
    1. Ceponiene R, Lepisto T, Soininen M, Aronen E, Alku P, et al. Event-related potentials associated with sound discrimination versus novelty detection in children. Psychophysiology. 2004;41:130–141.
    1. Ceponiene R, Yaguchi K, Shestakova A, Alku P, Suominen K, et al. Sound complexity and ‘speechness’ effects on pre-attentive auditory discrimination in children. Int J Psychophysiol. 2002;43:199–211.
    1. Alonso-Bua B, Diaz F, Ferraces MJ. The contribution of AERPs (MMN and LDN) to studying temporal vs. linguistic processing deficits in children with reading difficulties. International Journal of Psychophysiology. 2006;59:159–167.
    1. Czamara D, Bruder J, Becker J, Bartling J, Hoffmann P, et al. Association of a rare variant with mismatch negativity in a region between KIAA0319 and DCDC2 in dyslexia. Behav Genet. 2011;41:110–119.
    1. Froyen DJ, Bonte ML, van Atteveldt N, Blomert L. The long road to automation: neurocognitive development of letter-speech sound processing. J Cogn Neurosci. 2009;21:567–580.
    1. Hommet C, Vidal J, Roux S, Blanc R, Barthez MA, et al. Topography of syllable change-detection electrophysiological indices in children and adults with reading disabilities. Neuropsychologia. 2009;47:761–770.
    1. Korpilahti P, Lang HA. Auditory ERP components and mismatch negativity in dysphasic children. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1994;91:256–264.
    1. Maurer U, Bucher K, Brem S, Benz R, Kranz F, et al. Biological Psychiatry; 2009. Neurophysiology in Preschool Improves Behavioral Prediction of Reading Ability Throughout Primary School.
    1. Maurer U, Bucher K, Brem S, Brandeis D. Altered responses to tone and phoneme mismatch in kindergartners at familial dyslexia risk. Neuroreport. 2003;14:2245–2250.
    1. Schulte-Korne G, Deimel W, Bartling J, Remschmidt H. Auditory processing and dyslexia: evidence for a specific speech processing deficit. Neuroreport. 1998;9:337–340.
    1. Schulte-Korne G, Deimel W, Bartling J, Remschmidt H. Speech perception deficit in dyslexic adults as measured by mismatch negativity (MMN). International Journal of Psychophysiology. 2001;40:77–87.
    1. Ceponiene R, Cheour M, Naatanen R. Interstimulus interval and auditory event-related potentials in children: evidence for multiple generators. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1998;108:345–354.
    1. Shestakova A, Huotilainen M, Ceponiene R, Cheour M. Event-related potentials associated with second language learning in children. Clin Neurophysiol. 2003;114:1507–1512.
    1. Zachau S, Rinker T, Korner B, Kohls G, Maas V, et al. Extracting rules: early and late mismatch negativity to tone patterns. Neuroreport. 2005;16:2015–2019.
    1. Heim S, Eulitz C, Kaufmann J, Fuchter I, Pantev C, et al. Atypical organisation of the auditory cortex in dyslexia as revealed by MEG. Neuropsychologia. 2000;38:1749–1759.
    1. Paul I, Bott C, Heim S, Wienbruch C, Elbert TR. Phonological but not auditory discrimination is impaired in dyslexia. The European Journal of Neuroscience. 2006;24:2945–2953.
    1. Shafer VL, Morr ML, Datta H, Kurtzberg D, Schwartz RG. Neurophysiological indexes of speech processing deficits in children with specific language impairment. J Cogn Neurosci. 2005;17:1168–1180.
    1. Banai K, Nicol T, Zecker SG, Kraus N. Brainstem timing: implications for cortical processing and literacy. J Neurosci. 2005;25:9850–9857.
    1. Lachmann T, Berti S, Kujala T, Schroger E. Diagnostic subgroups of developmental dyslexia have different deficits in neural processing of tones and phonemes. International Journal of Psychophysiology. 2005;56:105–120.
    1. Dalebout SD, Fox LG. Reliability of the mismatch negativity in the responses of individual listeners. J Am Acad Audiol. 2001;12:245–253.
    1. Picton TW, Alain C, Otten L, Ritter W, Achim A. Mismatch negativity: different water in the same river. Audiol Neurootol. 2000;5:111–139.
    1. Stoodley CJ, Hill PR, Stein JF, Bishop DV. Auditory event-related potentials differ in dyslexics even when auditory psychophysical performance is normal. Brain Research. 2006;1121:190–199.
    1. Schulte-Korne G, Deimel W, Bartling J, Remschmidt H. Pre-attentive processing of auditory patterns in dyslexic human subjects. Neurosci Lett. 1999;276:41–44.
    1. Schulte-Korne G, Deimel W, Bartling J, Remschmidt H. The role of phonological awareness, speech perception, and auditory temporal processing for dyslexia. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1999;8(Suppl 3):28–34.
    1. Roeske D, Ludwig KU, Neuhoff N, Becker J, Bartling J, et al. Molecular Psychiatry; 2011. First genome-wide association scan on neurophysiological endophenotypes points to trans-regulation effects on SLC2A3 in dyslexic children.
    1. Paracchini S, Scerri T, Monaco AP. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics; 2007. The Genetic Lexicon of Dyslexia.
    1. Scerri TS, Schulte-Korne G. Genetics of developmental dyslexia. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2010;19:179–197.
    1. Hannula-Jouppi K, Kaminen-Ahola N, Taipale M, Eklund R, Nopola-Hemmi J, et al. The axon guidance receptor gene ROBO1 is a candidate gene for developmental dyslexia. PLoS Genet. 2005;1:e50.
    1. Cope N, Harold D, Hill G, Moskvina V, Stevenson J, et al. Strong evidence that KIAA0319 on chromosome 6p is a susceptibility gene for developmental dyslexia. Am J Hum Genet. 2005;76:581–591.
    1. Meng H, Smith SD, Hager K, Held M, Liu J, et al. DCDC2 is associated with reading disability and modulates neuronal development in the brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;102:17053–17058.
    1. Taipale M, Kaminen N, Nopola-Hemmi J, Haltia T, Myllyluoma B, et al. A candidate gene for developmental dyslexia encodes a nuclear tetratricopeptide repeat domain protein dynamically regulated in brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100:11553–11558.
    1. Shaywitz SE, Shaywitz BA. Paying attention to reading: the neurobiology of reading and dyslexia. Dev Psychopathol. 2008;20:1329–1349.
    1. McCandliss BD, Noble KG. The development of reading impairment: a cognitive neuroscience model. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2003;9:196–204.
    1. Richlan F, Kronbichler M, Wimmer H. Meta-analyzing brain dysfunctions in dyslexic children and adults. NeuroIimage. 2011;56:1735–1742.
    1. Brunswick N, McCrory E, Price CJ, Frith CD, Frith U. Explicit and implicit processing of words and pseudowords by adult developmental dyslexics: A search for Wernicke’s Wortschatz? Brain 122 (Pt. 1999;10):1901–1917.
    1. Pugh KR, Mencl WE, Jenner AR, Katz L, Frost SJ, et al. Functional neuroimaging studies of reading and reading disability (developmental dyslexia). Mental retardation and developmental disabilities research reviews. 2000;6:207–213.
    1. Rumsey JM, Horwitz B, Donohue BC, Nace K, Maisog JM, et al. Phonological and orthographic components of word recognition. A PET-rCBF study. Brain 120 (Pt. 1997;5):739–759.
    1. Shaywitz BA, Shaywitz SE, Pugh KR, Mencl WE, Fulbright RK, et al. Disruption of posterior brain systems for reading in children with developmental dyslexia. Biol Psychiatry. 2002;52:101–110.
    1. McCrory EJ, Mechelli A, Frith U, Price CJ. More than words: a common neural basis for reading and naming deficits in developmental dyslexia? Brain. 2005;128:261–267.
    1. Salmelin R Service E, Kiesila P, Uutela K, Salonen O. Impaired visual word processing in dyslexia revealed with magnetoencephalography. Ann Neurol. 1996;40:157–162.
    1. Cohen L, Dehaene S. Specialization within the ventral stream: the case for the visual word form area. NeuroImage. 2004;22:466–476.
    1. Wolf M, Bowers PG. Naming-speed processes and developmental reading disabilities: an introduction to the special issue on the double-deficit hypothesis. J Learn Disabil. 2000;33:322–324.
    1. Tallal P, Miller S, Fitch RH. Neurobiological basis of speech: a case for the preeminence of temporal processing. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993;682:27–47.
    1. Simmons FR, Singleton C. Do weak phonological representations impact on arithmetic development? A review of research into arithmetic and dyslexia. Dyslexia. 2008;14:77–94.
    1. Nicolson RI, Fawcett AJ. J Neural Transm Suppl; 2005. Developmental dyslexia, learning and the cerebellum. pp. 19–36.
    1. Gottesman, II, Gould TD. The endophenotype concept in psychiatry: etymology and strategic intentions. The American Journal of Psychiatry. 2003;160:636–645.
    1. Ludwig KU, Roeske D, Schumacher J, Schulte-Korne G, Konig IR, et al. Investigation of interaction between DCDC2 and KIAA0319 in a large German dyslexia sample. Journal of Neural Transmission. 2008;115:1587–1589.
    1. Weiß RH, Osterland J. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 1997. Grundintelligenztest Skala 1 (CFT 1).
    1. Brähler E, Holling V, Leutner D, Petermann F. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2002. Brickenkamp Handbuch psychologisccher und pädagogischer Tests.
    1. Schulte-Körne G, Deimel W, Remschmidt H. Diagnosis of reading and spelling disorder. Zeitschrift für Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie und Psychotherapie. 2001;29:113–116.
    1. Ziegler JC, Goswami U. Becoming literate in different languages: similar problems, different solutions. Dev Sci. 2006;9:429–436.
    1. Wimmer H. Characteristrics of developmental dyslexia in a regular writing system. Applied Psycholinguistics. 1993;14:1–33.
    1. Wimmer H. The early manifestation of developmental dyslexia: Evidence from German children. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 1996;8:171–188.
    1. Landerl K, Wimmer H, Frith U. The impact of orthographic consistency on dyslexia: a German-English comparison. Cognition. 1997;63:315–334.
    1. Landerl K, Wimmer H. Developmental of word reading fluency and spelling in a consitent orthography: An 8-year follow up. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2008;100:150–161.
    1. Schumacher J, Anthoni H, Dahdouh F, Konig IR, Hillmer AM, et al. Strong genetic evidence of DCDC2 as a susceptibility gene for dyslexia. American Journal of Human Genetics. 2006;78:52–62.
    1. Schulte-Korne G, Ziegler A, Deimel W, Schumacher J, Plume E, et al. Interrelationship and familiality of dyslexia related quantitative measures. Annals of Human Genetics. 2007;71:160–175.
    1. Unnewehr S, Schneider S, Margraf J. Berlin: Springer; 1998. Kinder-DIPS: diagnostisches Interview bei psychischen Störungen von Kindern und Jugendlichen.
    1. Giard MH, Perrin F, Pernier J, Bouchet P. Brain generators implicated in the processing of auditory stimulus deviance: a topographic event-related potential study. Psychophysiology. 1990;27:627–640.
    1. Meng X, Sai X, Wang C, Wang J, Sha S, et al. Auditory and speech processing and reading development in Chinese school children: behavioural and ERP evidence. Dyslexia. 2005;11:292–310.
    1. Sebastian C, Yasin I. Speech versus tone processing in compensated dyslexia: discrimination and lateralization with a dichotic mismatch negativity (MMN) paradigm. Int J Psychophysiol. 2008;70:115–126.
    1. Schulte-Korne G, Deimel W, Bartling J, Remschmidt H. Role of auditory temporal processing for reading and spelling disability. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1998;86:1043–1047.

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit