IMR Press / JIN / Volume 22 / Issue 3 / DOI: 10.31083/j.jin2203059
Cite this article
Nanoparticles: Properties, applications and toxicities
69
Downloads
209
Views
Submit to JIN
Review for JIN
Apply for Special Issue
  • Academic Editor
    Gernot Riedel
Chapters
Figures
References
Abstract
Keywords
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Availability of Data and Materials
Author Contributions
Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate
Acknowledgment
Funding
Conflict of Interest
Appendix
References
Open Access Original Research
EEG Source Localization during an Arm Isometric Force Exertion Task at Different Levels of Perceived Exertion
Lina Ismail1,*, Waldemar Karwowski2,*
Show Less
1 Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, Arab Academy for Science, Technology, and Maritime Transport, 1029 Alexandria, Egypt
2 Computational Neuroergonomics Laboratory, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32826, USA
*Correspondence: linaelsherif@Knights.ucf.edu (Lina Ismail); wkar@ucf.edu (Waldemar Karwowski)
J. Integr. Neurosci. 2023, 22(3), 59; https://doi.org/10.31083/j.jin2203059
Submitted: 25 September 2022 | Revised: 20 December 2022 | Accepted: 29 December 2022 | Published: 8 May 2023
Copyright: © 2023 The Author(s). Published by IMR Press.
This is an open access article under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Download PDF
Brower Figures
Cite
Abstract

Background: Neuroergonomics is an emerging science that focuses on the human brain’s performance during physical work. The advent of portable neurophysiological methods, including electroencephalography (EEG), has enabled measurements of real-time brain activity during physical tasks without restricting body movements. However, the EEG signatures of different levels of physical exertion activity involving the musculoskeletal system remain poorly understood. Objective: This study investigated the EEG source localization activity induced by predefined force exertion levels during an isometric arm force exertion task in healthy female participants for the alpha and beta frequency bands. Methods: Exact low-resolution electromagnetic tomography (eLORETA) was used to localize the current source densities (CSDs) in 84 anatomical brain regions of interest. Results: The maximum CSDs for extremely hard force exertion levels for the alpha frequency were localized in Brodmann area (BA) 6, whereas CSDs associated with other exertion levels were localized in BA 8. The maximum CSDs for extremely hard force exertion levels for beta were localized in BA 5, whereas CSDs associated with other exertion levels were localized in BA 7. Conclusions: These findings extend the current understanding of the neurophysiological basis of physical exertion with various force levels and suggest that specific brain regions are involved in generating the sensation of force exertion. To our knowledge, this is the first study localizing EEG activity among various predefined force exertion levels during an isometric arm exertion task in healthy female participants.

Keywords
Brodmann areas
EEG
eLORETA
force exertion
perceived exertion
1. Introduction
1.1 Perceived Exertion

Numerous occupations require the application of muscular strength in the workplace for lifting, carrying, pulling, pushing, holding, moving, or restraining objects. Forceful exertion, high task repetition, and sustained awkward postures occurring in the workplace are ergonomic risk factors that significantly increase the likelihood of work-related musculoskeletal disorders [1] in addition to individual-related risk factors [2, 3].

Human muscular strength is defined as the maximum force that a muscle can generate under prescribed conditions, varying according to gender, sex, weight, and stature [4, 5]. Perceived muscular exertion, also known as perception of effort or the sense of effort, is the conscious sensation of physical activity [6, 7] that provides information regarding the difficulty of a physical task or exercise intensity. The perception of physical exertion is subject to the psychophysical power law [8], which defines the nonlinear relationship between the perceived intensity and the strength of a physical stimulus. Improving understanding of the mechanisms underlying the generation of the perception of effort [9], endurance in physical performance [10, 11], and the relationship between workload and physical fatigue [12, 13] are important to prevent work-related musculoskeletal injuries.

Various subjective and physiological measures have been used to quantify perceived exertion during physical activity. Specifically, the rate of perceived exertion, introduced by Borg [14, 15, 16], has been found to be a useful tool for assessing perceived exertion through subjective rating of a physical activity’s strenuousness or difficulty. Although subjective scaling methods have greatly contributed to the assessment of perceived exertion [17, 18], they are insufficient for decoding complete perception [19, 20, 21]. Karwowski et al. [22] have highlighted the importance of studying human brain function during physical activities combined with perceptual, cognitive, and affective processes, under the umbrella of “physical neuroergonomics”.

Studying the neural signatures of physical exertion might provide useful information to aid in explaining the integration of physiological and psychological processes involved in physical activities [23]. In this regard, identifying the brain regions associated with force exertion with various levels of perceived rates of physical exertion is important.

1.2 Electroencephalography

Recently, a combination of techniques and methods have been used to measure and evaluate neural signatures associated with human activities observed in everyday settings [24, 25, 26]. Neurophysiological measures provide reliable assessments of the brain’s functional states that can be acquired through various techniques [27]. Electroencephalography (EEG), a powerful noninvasive technique, is one of the most commonly used neurophysiological techniques to study the high-temporal dynamics of functional brain networks on the order of milliseconds [28, 29, 30]. Despite the low spatial resolution of the EEG, it is possible to make spatial measurements [31]. The mobility and portability of contemporary EEG systems enables recording of brain data during physical movements without any restrictions, thus offering new opportunities for sports neuroscience, neuromarketing, brain-computer interfaces, and human factor studies [32, 33, 34]. Despite these benefits, little is known regarding the neural processes underlying the perception of physical exertion according to EEG neurophysiological data, particularly in work-related settings.

1.2.1 Quantification of EEG Signals in Physical Activity

EEG signals are composed of different frequency components divided into frequency bands and rhythms including delta (0.5–3.5 Hz), theta (4–8 Hz), alpha (8–13 Hz), beta (13–30 Hz), and gamma (30–100 Hz) bands. The most commonly analyzed EEG bands to assess human physical activities are the alpha and beta bands [35, 36]. In general, temporary changes in the power spectrum density of alpha and beta bands are associated with various levels of physical activity [37, 38, 39, 40, 41]. Frontal alpha activity is crucial for evaluating human performance during physical task performance [41, 42]. For instance, the absolute power of alpha activity is greater immediately after and during physical activity [43]. The power of the alpha band in the central brain region increases under conditions of muscle fatigue [44] and in frontal brain regions after exercise [45]. Moraes et al. [46] have reported an increase in the power of the beta band in frontal and central brain areas associated with increased cortical activation. Similarly, Bailey et al. [47] have reported an increase in theta, alpha, and beta power in frontal, central, and parietal brain regions with higher levels of physical workload. An increase in cortical activation after a maximal effort exercise has been demonstrated through an increase in the absolute value of beta power in frontal and central brain areas [46]. An increase in the power spectrum density of the prefrontal and central beta bands is also associated with greater muscle fiber recruitment [35]. Of note, an earlier study by Kubitz and Mott [48] has reported that an increase in the level of the cortical activation during physical activity is associated with decreased alpha power and increased beta power. Recent studies have combined energy parameters for alpha and beta with connectivity and complexity parameters to detect mental fatigue during physical-mental tasks [49].

1.2.2 Quantification of EEG Signals and EEG Source Localization

The evaluation of changes in the brain activity after localization of the EEG source through brain mapping and by solving the inverse solution problem has been the focus of many neuroscience studies [50]. These studies have discussed and assessed changes in brain function corresponding to specific brain regions commonly known as Brodmann areas (BA). For example, Schneider et al. [51] have reported an increase in alpha activity in the left frontal gyrus region corresponding to BA 8 immediately after physical exercise, with respect to the pre-exercise state, as well as significant changes in beta and gamma activity in BA18 after 15 minutes of exercise. Enders et al. [52] have shown that high-intensity exercise induces greater brain activity in BA 8, followed by BA 6 and BA 7, for the alpha and beta bands.

In general, exercise preferences affect brain activation patterns differently. For example, Schneider et al. [53] found an increase in the alpha activity in both parietal brain regions after biking exercise, whereas other treadmill, biking, and arm-crank exercise showed increases in the beta band corresponding to BA 7. In another study, an increase in the left frontal gyrus, corresponding to BA 8, was found immediately after exercise [51], whereas decreases were observed in alpha 2 (9.9–12.9) Hz, beta 1 (12.9–19.2) Hz, and gamma activity in the left inferior, middle, and superior temporal gyri, corresponding to BA 18, 20, 21, and 22, respectively. A comparison of younger and older participants in a pre- and post-exercise study has indicated significant increases in alpha and beta 2 (18–30) Hz activity in BA 24, 33, and 23 in the younger group only [40]. A frontal alpha increase has been shown to be associated with affective responses [42], emotional processing [54], motor coordination [51], mood improvement, diminished anxiety, and calmness [40].

1.2.3 Quantification of EEG Signals in Physical Exertion Tasks

Nybo and Nielsen [55, 56] have hypothesized that perceived exertion is associated with altered EEG brain activity, mainly in the frontal region, during physical exercise. Specifically, the prefrontal cortex plays an important role in the initiation of volitional movement [57, 58, 59]. Guoa et al. [60] have reported an association between perceived exertion and cortical activity during movement execution, including the prefrontal cortex, supplementary motor area, and primary motor cortex. The power spectrum of alpha and beta for the F3 electrode in the prefrontal cortex enables prediction of the rate of perceived exertion.

The premotor cortex, supplementary motor area, and primary motor cortex are associated with the planning and execution of movement and voluntary actions [61, 62, 63]. The EEG amplitude of motor-related cortical potentials at frontal–central brain electrode sites has been shown to be a useful measure for assessing the intensity of perceived exertion associated with increasing force production rates [64] and different weight levels [65]. Desmurget et al. [66] have suggested that the frontal cortex and the parietal cortex, primarily the posterior parietal cortex, are involved in the experience of conscious intention. Theoretically, the prefrontal cortex, the presupplementary and supplementary motor areas, the premotor cortex, the primary motor cortex, and the posterior parietal cortex can be considered crucial brain regions, along with sensory brain areas [67], for investigating the perception of physical effort [65]. Although the neural mechanisms regarding the perception of physical efforts have been studied to some extent, more neurophysiological studies are needed to better understand brain function and dysfunction among brain regions that form large-scale networks.

The main objective of this study was to investigate EEG source localization activity induced by different force exertion levels in a group of healthy female participants for two frequency bands.

To our knowledge, this is the first study localizing the EEG activity among various predefined force exertion levels during an isometric arm exertion task in healthy female participants. This article is organized as follows: section 2 outlines the methods; section 3 describes the statistical analysis; section 4 describes the results; and section 5 provides a discussion. In the final section, we present our conclusions.

2. Materials and Methods
2.1 Participants

The study included 12 healthy female participants who met the experimental requirements, including an absence of history of cardiovascular problems, neurological disorders, fatigue-related disorders, chronic physical, and musculoskeletal disease. Pregnant female participants were not allowed to participate. Participants were instructed not to consume any medication, coffee, or alcohol for a minimum of 24 hours before the experiment, and not to exercise for 48 hours before the study. To minimize the risk of selection bias, all participants were randomly selected. The participants had no previous knowledge regarding the study purpose (to decrease performance bias) and hypothesized outcomes (to decrease detection bias). All incomplete data outcomes (i.e., reporting bias) and excluded data (i.e., attention bias) were recorded [68].

2.2 Experimental Task and Protocol

The laboratory experiment was designed to record EEG signals during an isometric arm exertion at predefined levels of exertion. The isometric arm exertion task was performed with the Jackson Strength Evaluation System [69]. The participants were asked to exert a force by pulling the chain upward by using their flexed arms without any body movement or jerking [3, 70]. Participants were instructed to avoid any unnecessary movement during the experiment. Participants were asked to apply the maximum force for 3 seconds for each of three trials separated by 30-second rest periods between each trial. Then a 5-minute rest was provided to avoid muscle fatigue. In the isometric arm exertion task, each participant was asked to exert a force that matched one of five predefined exertion levels: (1) extremely light, (2) light, (3) somewhat hard, (4) hard, and (5) extremely hard. The force levels were selected from a 6–20 scale of perceived exertion proposed by Borg [15]. The participants were asked to maintain steady-state exertion for 3 seconds for three trials separated by 120-second rest periods between trials. The order of force exertion levels was determined randomly to prevent potential learning effects. The total time for arm experiment for each participant with EEG preparation time lasts for approximately 62 minutes, unless participants asked for more rest. The laboratory study was conducted in a temperature-controlled and sound-attenuated laboratory in the computational neuroergonomics laboratory at the University of Central Florida. This environment helped participants concentrate on task performance and minimized non-physiological artifacts [71, 72].

2.3 EEG Recordings and Data Acquisition

EEG signals were recorded with a CGX-64 Mobile gel-based system electrode cap with Ag/AgCl active electrodes positioned according to the 10–10 international montage system (CGX system, San Diego, CA, USA, available in https://www.cgxsystems.com/). The EEG signals were acquired in Cognionics acquisition software 6.6 [73]. A super Visc (Brain vision solutions, Morrisville, NC, USA) electrolyte gel was used for active electrodes, and the connecting impedance was kept below 10 kΩ. To avoid aliasing effect, physiological signals were sampled at 500 Hz with a bandpass filter of 0.1–100 Hz. Bad EEG channels were removed with an automatic bad channel rejection EEGLAB toolbox known as clean_raw data [74]. EEG artifacts were eliminated through an adaptive mixture independent-component analysis method [75]. Then components that appeared to be eye movements or blinking, electrocardiography, motion artifacts, or noise channels were manually removed. EEG pre-processing was performed in EEGLAB version 14.1.2b (SCCN, San Diego, CA, USA) [76], an open-source toolbox that runs on MATLAB R2019b software (MathWorks, Natick, MA, USA).

2.4 EEG Feature Extrction and Source Localization

The Fast Fourier Transform was used to extract EEG cross spectra for two frequency bands (alpha = 8–13 Hz and beta = 13–30 Hz) for each participant, using eLORETA software [77]. The exact low-resolution electromagnetic tomography (eLORETA) is a genuine inverse solution with exact zero error localization [78]. The software parcellates the EEG spectral current density into 6239 voxels with a spatial resolution of 5 mm3 in the cortical grey matter based on a on a realistic head model [79] available as a digitized MRI from the Brain Imaging Centre Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) 152 template [80]. Active cortical regions created by allocating the raw eLORETA values of individual voxels to their corresponding Brodmann areas (BA) on the basis of the coordinates of the digitized Talairach Atlas [81]. This resulted in three-dimensional distribution of current density across voxels in the brain for each participant for each exertion level [82, 83]. A voxel-wise approach was used to define the regions of interest (ROI) according to anatomical labels corresponding to Brodmann areas (BA) provided by eLORETA software package that are based on the Talairach Daemon (http://www.talairach.org/) [84]. We selected the whole brain 84 ROI (42 for each hemisphere) provided by eLORETA software. This step helped in converting the EEG from sensor levels to source level. eLORETA has been widely used in several studies using real human data [85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91] and shown to be more robust and accurate than other source-localization methods [92, 93].

2.5 Statistical Analysis

For statistical analysis of CSD, the software package of the eLORETA applies a statistical nonparametric mapping method (SnPM) [94]. We analyzed the differences in CSD between different exertion levels for each frequency band with voxel-by-voxel independent F-ratio-tests, based upon eLORETA log-transformed current source density power. This results in three-dimensional statistical mapping, cortical voxels with significant differences were identified by means of a nonparametric permutation/randomization procedure (i.e., based on the Fisher’s permutation method, with the critical probability threshold set at the 5% probability level), comparing the mean source power in each voxel and the distribution in the permutated values. By evaluating the empirical probability distribution of the “maximal-statistics” in the null hypothesis, permutation and randomization tests have demonstrated to be effective in controlling the Type I error [86, 94, 95]. We used 5000 data randomizations to determine the critical probability threshold values for the actually observed log F-ratio values with correction for multiple comparisons across all voxels and all frequencies, without the need to rely on Gaussianity.

3. Results
3.1 Current Source Density

eLORETA resulted in three-dimensional intracerebral CSDs of the electrical neuronal generators for alpha and beta waves in each participant. The average CSD for each exertion level for each frequency band for female participants was computed. Detailed information regarding the brain structure, the maximum activated BA with MNI coordinates, and voxel threshold (Th-values) for each exertion level for alpha frequency bands is shown (Appendix Table 5).

For the alpha band, the highest CSD was found in the middle frontal gyrus of the frontal lobe, corresponding to BA 6, for the extremely hard exertion level only. However, for all other exertion levels, the highest CSD was found in the superior frontal gyrus of the frontal lobe, corresponding to BA 8 (Fig. 1). Detailed information regarding the brain structure, the maximum activated BA with MNI coordinates, and voxel threshold (Th-values) for each exertion level for alpha frequency bands is provided in Table 1.

Fig. 1.

Average CSD for each exertion level for the alpha frequency band (red to yellow indicates source-localization strengthening).

Table 1.CSD localization for the alpha frequency band for each exertion level.
Exertion level Alpha frequency band
Brain structure Maximum activated BA with MNI coordinates Voxel threshold (Th-value)
Extremely hard MFG BA 6, MNI (X = 5, Y = 20, Z = 65) 9.49 × 104
Hard SFG BA 8, MNI (X = 10, Y = 50, Z = 45) 4.78 × 104
Somewhat hard SFG BA 8, MNI (X = 10, Y = 50, Z = 45) 4.77 × 104
Light SFG BA 8, MNI (X = 10, Y = 50, Z = 45) 4.79 × 104
Extremely light SFG BA 8, MNI (X = 10, Y = 50, Z = 45) 4.79 × 104
BA, Brodmann area; MNI, Montreal Neurological Institute; Th-value, threshold; MFG, middle frontal gyrus; SFG, superior frontal gyrus.

For the beta band, the highest CSD was localized in the postcentral gyrus of the parietal lobe, corresponding to BA 5, for the extremely hard exertion level (Fig. 2). For all other exertion levels, the highest CSD was highly localized in the precuneus of the parietal lobe, corresponding to BA 7. Detailed information regarding the brain structure, the maximum activated BA with MNI coordinates, and voxel threshold (Th-values) for each exertion level for beta frequency bands is shown in Table 2.

Fig. 2.

Average eLORETA source current density for each exertion level for the beta frequency band (red to yellow indicates source-localization strengthening).

Table 2.CSD localization for the beta frequency band for each exertion level.
Exertion level Beta frequency band
Brain structure Maximum activated BA with MNI coordinates Voxel threshold (Th-value)
Extremely hard Postcentral gyrus BA 5, MNI (X = 5, Y = –50, Z = 70) 1.75 × 105
Hard Precuneus gyrus BA 7, MNI (X = 10, Y = –60, Z = 70) 1.31 × 105
Somewhat hard Precuneus gyrus BA 7, MNI (X = 10, Y = –60, Z = 70) 1.31 × 105
Light Precuneus gyrus BA 7, MNI (X = 10, Y = –60, Z = 70) 1.30 × 105
Extremely light Precuneus gyrus BA 7, MNI (X = 10, Y = –60, Z = 70) 1.30 × 105
BA, Brodmann area; MNI, Montreal Neurological Institute; Th-value, threshold.
3.2 eLORETA Statistics and Multiple-Comparison Corrections

A pairwise comparison between exertion levels for two frequency bands was performed. The CSDs for pairwise exertion levels resulting from the permutation test applied in eLORETA are displayed in Table 3 for alpha frequency and Table 4 for beta frequency. For illustration purposes, the three-dimensional statistical mapping figures are also provided, wherein yellow indicates an increase in oscillatory activity, and blue indicates a decrease in oscillatory activity. Herein, we focused on providing the three-dimensional statistical mapping figures for comparison between the extreme exertion levels (i.e., extremely hard, and extremely light) and the moderate exertion level (i.e., somewhat hard) for the two frequency bands, to avoid excessive figures.

Table 3.Statistical comparison of eLORETA estimated current source density for pairwise exertion levels for alpha frequency.
Exertion level comparison Brain structure Maximum/minimum activated BA Threshold value (Th-value) for p < 0.05
EH vs H Precentral gyrus BA 4 T-max = 1.45
EH vs SWH Precentral gyrus BA 4 T-max = 1.45
EH vs L Precentral gyrus BA 4 T-max = 1.45
EH vs EL Precentral gyrus BA 4 T-max = 1.45
H vs SWH Precentral gyrus BA 7 T-max = 0.009
H vs L Superior temporal gyrus BA 22 T-max = 0.009
H vs EL Superior temporal gyrus BA 22 T-min = 0.009
SWH vs L Middle temporal gyrus BA 21 T-min = 0.00837
L vs EL Precuneus BA 7 T-max = 0.00442
EH, extremely hard; H, hard; SWH, somewhat hard; L, light; EL, extremely light.
Table 4.Statistical comparison of eLORETA estimated current source density for pairwise exertion levels for beta frequency.
Exertion level comparison Brain structure Maximum/minimum activated BA Threshold value (Th-value) for p < 0.05
EH vs H Inferior parietal lobule BA 40 T-max = 0.405
EH vs SWH Inferior parietal lobule BA 40 T-max = 0.407
EH vs L Inferior parietal lobule BA 40 T-max = 0.407
EH vs EL Postcentral gyrus BA 2 T-max = 0.388
H vs SWH Inferior parietal lobule BA 40 T-min = 0.00153
H vs L Middle occipital gyrus BA 19 T-min = 0.00231
H vs EL Precentral gyrus BA 4 T-max = 0.003
SWH vs L Precuneus gyrus BA 31 T-max = 0.00155
L vs EL Precentral gyrus in frontal lobe BA 4 T-max = 0.003
EH, extremely hard; H, hard; SWH, somewhat hard; L, light; EL, extremely light.

Fig. 3 is a representation of the three-dimensional statistical mapping resulting from the comparison of eLORETA CSD between the extremely hard exertion levels for the alpha band. The extremely hard exertion level, compared with the extremely light exertion level, resulted in neurons that oscillated more strongly in the frontal lobe (precentral gyrus, BA 4 (X = 65, Y = –5, Z = 20), BA 6, (X = 65, Y = –5, Z = 25)) and the parietal lobe (postcentral gyrus, BA 43 (X = 65, Y = –10, Z = 20)), with a log-F-ratio threshold T-max = 1.459.

Fig. 3.

Three-dimensional statistical mapping for the alpha frequency band in extremely hard vs extremely light exertion levels.

The three-dimensional statistical mapping resulting from the comparison of eLORETA CSD between the extreme exertion levels for beta band is shown in Fig. 4. Extremely hard exertion, compared with extremely light exertion, resulted in neurons that oscillated more strongly in the parietal lobe (inferior parietal lobule, BA 40 (X = 60, Y = –35, Z = 50) and postcentral gyrus, BA 2 (X = 60, Y = –30, Z = 50), with a log-F-ratio threshold T-max = 0.407.

Fig. 4.

eLORETA statistical maps for the beta frequency band in extremely hard vs extremely light exertion levels.

The three-dimensional statistical mapping resulting from the comparison of eLORETA CSD between the extremely hard and somewhat hard exertion levels for the alpha band is depicted in Fig. 5. Extremely hard exertion resulted in neurons that oscillated more strongly than those at the somewhat hard exertion level in the frontal lobe (precentral gyrus, BA 6 (X = 65, Y = –5, Z = 25), with a log-F-ratio threshold T-max = 1.458).

Fig. 5.

eLORETA statistical maps for the alpha frequency band in extremely hard vs somewhat hard exertion levels.

Fig. 6 depicts the three-dimensional statistical mapping resulting from the comparison of eLORETA CSD between the extremely hard and somewhat hard exertion levels for the beta band. The extremely hard exertions resulted in neurons that oscillated more strongly than those at the somewhat hard exertion level in the parietal lobe (inferior parietal lobule, BA 40 (X = 65, Y = –35, Z = 50), with a log-F-ratio threshold T-max = 0.406).

Fig. 6.

eLORETA statistical maps for the beta frequency band in extremely hard vs somewhat hard exertion levels.

4. Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first study localizing the EEG activity among various predefined force exertion levels during an isometric arm exertion task in healthy female participants. In this study, eLORETA was used with EEG data to examine the effects of induced force exertion in healthy female participants. We applied source localization to identify the activated brain regions at various predefined physical exertion levels for both the alpha and beta bands and detected the maximum activated brain regions at each physical exertion level at each frequency band.

For the alpha band, the maximum CSD was found in the superior frontal gyrus of the frontal lobe, corresponding to BA 6, under the extremely hard exertion level only. However, for all other exertion levels, the highest CSD was observed in the middle frontal gyrus of the frontal lobe, corresponding to BA 8. Findings from this study are in line with previous results reported by Schneider et al. [53], who have concluded that high-intensity physical exercise is associated with in an increase in the CSD of the alpha band in frontal brain areas corresponding to the prefrontal cortex (BA 9) and premotor cortex (BA6). Greater neural activity in BA 9 and BA 6 is crucial for motor planning and sensory integration [53]. In general, changes in the brain activity in the frontal brain regions are involved in cognitive processes such as decision-making, attention motivation, and emotional processing [54, 96, 97, 98]. Therefore, future research should consider that tasks with forceful exertion might affect participants’ moods and workers’ general feelings of wellbeing [99, 100, 101]. Furthermore, the elevated brain activity in these regions might be affected by the progression of fatigue as a result of elevated exertion [102]. Therefore, future studies must investigate the changes in the CSD regarding fatigue exertion task.

For beta activity, the maximum CSD was found in the postcentral gyrus of the parietal lobe, corresponding to BA 5, under only the extremely hard exertion level. For all other exertion levels, the maximum CSD was localized in the precuneus of the parietal lobe, corresponding to BA 7, which is believed to be predominant in motor behavior in general [101, 103], somatosensory perception [104], and conscious awareness [105]. Our results are consistent with those of Fontes et al. [106], who have reported high activation of the posterior cingulate gyrus and precuneus under perceived hard exertion and hypothesized that the “posterior region and precuneus might integrate physiological afferent signals from the periphery to promote emotional and conscious control during exercise through perceived exertion”.

One limitation of the present study is the limited sample of female participants. Another limitation is the selection of only alpha and beta frequency bands. Future studies may need to explore other frequency bands, such as theta and gamma, in studying brain activity in physical exertion tasks. Moreover, this study considered only an arm exertion task, although other body parts, such as the legs and torso, substantially contribute to work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Despite the study limitations, the present study confirms the interest in merging brain activity with perceived exertion in physical tasks to understand the underlying neurophysiological basis under different force levels of human physical exertion and consequently decrease work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Future studies may also pay more attention to connectivity estimation methods to investigate the differences in network topological properties with different force levels [107].

5. Conclusions

Our findings highlight the dynamic changes in brain activity associated with various levels of predefined forces exerted under predefined task conditions in healthy female participants. For the extremely hard exertion level only the highest CSD was found in the middle frontal gyrus of the frontal lobe (BA 6) for the alpha band. However, for all other exertion levels, the highest CSD was found in the superior frontal gyrus of the frontal lobe (BA 8). For the extremely hard exertion level only, the highest CSD was localized in the postcentral gyrus of the parietal lobe (BA 5) for the beta band. However, for all other exertion levels, the highest CSD was highly localized in the precuneus of the parietal lobe (BA 7). The results of this study appear to provide additional evidence confirming that the human brain recruits’ resources to efficiently respond to increasing demand for exerted force in physical tasks in addition to the need to maintain the required level of task cognitive processes. To our knowledge, this is the first study localizing the EEG activity among various predefined force exertion levels during an isometric arm exertion task in healthy female participants.

Availability of Data and Materials

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to privacy and ethical concerns but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Author Contributions

LI and WK contributed to the conception and design of the study and were involved in drafting and critically revising the manuscript. LI performed experimental work and data processing. WK contributed to the analysis and results of the experimental work. LI provided the discussion of the data and prepared the first draft of the manuscript then WK worked on the draft to produce the final version and gave final approval for publication. All authors contributed to editorial changes in the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. All authors have participated sufficiently in the work and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate

This study was approved by the ethical committee of the Institutional Review Board at the University of Central Florida (STUDY00000535). All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study.

Acknowledgment

We thank to all the peer reviewers for their opinions and suggestions. Furthermore, we thank all participants in the experiment.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix

See Table 5.

Table 5.Montreal Neurophysiological Institute (MNI) coordinates of the 84 regions of interest used to analyze the electroencephalograph signal of each exertion level.
Hemisphere MNI Lobe Structure Brodmann area ROI
X Y Z
Left –35 –25 55 Frontal Lobe Precentral Gyrus BA 4 1
Right 35 –20 50 Frontal Lobe Precentral Gyrus BA 4 2
Right 15 –45 60 Frontal Lobe Paracentral Lobule BA 5 3
Left –15 –45 60 Frontal Lobe Paracentral Lobule BA 5 4
Right 30 –5 55 Frontal Lobe Middle Frontal Gyrus BA 6 5
Left –30 –5 55 Frontal Lobe Middle Frontal Gyrus BA 6 6
Right 20 25 50 Frontal Lobe Superior Frontal Gyrus BA 8 7
Left –20 30 50 Frontal Lobe Superior Frontal Gyrus BA 8 8
Left –30 30 35 Frontal Lobe Middle Frontal Gyrus BA 9 9
Right 30 30 35 Frontal Lobe Middle Frontal Gyrus BA 9 10
Right 25 55 5 Frontal Lobe Superior Frontal Gyrus BA 10 11
Left –25 55 5 Frontal Lobe Superior Frontal Gyrus BA 10 12
Right 20 45 –20 Frontal Lobe Superior Frontal Gyrus BA 11 13
Left –20 40 –15 Frontal Lobe Middle Frontal Gyrus BA 11 14
Right 5 15 –15 Frontal Lobe Subcallosal Gyrus BA 25 15
Left –10 20 –15 Frontal Lobe Medial Frontal Gyrus BA 25 16
Right 55 10 15 Frontal Lobe Precentral Gyrus BA 44 17
Left –50 10 15 Frontal Lobe Precentral Gyrus BA 44 18
Right 50 20 15 Frontal Lobe Inferior Frontal Gyrus BA 45 19
Left –50 20 15 Frontal Lobe Inferior Frontal Gyrus BA 45 20
Right 45 35 20 Frontal Lobe Middle Frontal Gyrus BA 46 21
Left –45 35 20 Frontal Lobe Middle Frontal Gyrus BA 46 22
Right 30 25 –15 Frontal Lobe Inferior Frontal Gyrus BA 47 23
Left –30 25 –15 Frontal Lobe Inferior Frontal Gyrus BA 47 24
Left –55 –25 50 Parietal Lobe Postcentral Gyrus BA 2 25
Left –45 –30 45 Parietal Lobe Postcentral Gyrus BA 2 26
Right 55 –25 50 Parietal Lobe Postcentral Gyrus BA 2 27
Right 35 –25 50 Parietal Lobe Postcentral Gyrus BA 3 28
Right 40 –25 50 Parietal Lobe Postcentral Gyrus BA 3 29
Left –20 –65 50 Parietal Lobe Precuneus BA 7 30
Right 15 –65 50 Parietal Lobe Precuneus BA 7 31
Left –10 –50 30 Parietal Lobe Precuneus BA 31 32
Right 10 –50 35 Parietal Lobe Precuneus BA 31 33
Right 50 –30 45 Parietal Lobe Inferior Parietal Lobule BA 40 34
Right 50 –45 45 Parietal Lobe Inferior Parietal Lobule BA 40 35
Left –50 –40 40 Parietal Lobe Inferior Parietal Lobule BA 40 36
Left –5 –40 25 Limbic Lobe Posterior Cingulate BA 23 37
Right 5 –45 25 Limbic Lobe Posterior Cingulate BA 23 38
Right 5 0 35 Limbic Lobe Cingulate Gyrus BA 24 39
Right 5 30 20 Limbic Lobe Anterior Cingulate BA 24 40
Left –5 0 35 Limbic Lobe Cingulate Gyrus BA 24 41
Left –5 30 20 Limbic Lobe Anterior Cingulate BA 24 42
Right 20 –35 –5 Limbic Lobe Parahippocampal Gyrus BA 27 43
Left –20 –35 –5 Limbic Lobe Parahippocampal Gyrus BA 27 44
Left –20 –10 –25 Limbic Lobe Parahippocampal Gyrus BA 28 45
Right 20 –10 –25 Limbic Lobe Parahippocampal Gyrus BA 28 46
Left –5 –50 5 Limbic Lobe Posterior Cingulate BA 29 47
Right 5 –50 5 Limbic Lobe Posterior Cingulate BA 29 48
Left –15 –60 5 Limbic Lobe Posterior Cingulate BA 30 49
Left –5 20 20 Limbic Lobe Anterior Cingulate BA 33 50
Right 0 20 20 Limbic Lobe Anterior Cingulate BA 33 51
Right 15 0 –20 Limbic Lobe Parahippocampal Gyrus BA 34 52
Left –15 0 –20 Limbic Lobe Parahippocampal Gyrus BA 34 53
Left –20 –25 –20 Limbic Lobe Parahippocampal Gyrus BA 35 54
Right 30 –25 –25 Limbic Lobe Parahippocampal Gyrus BA 35 55
Right 25 –25 –20 Limbic Lobe Parahippocampal Gyrus BA 35 56
Left –30 –30 –25 Limbic Lobe Parahippocampal Gyrus BA 36 57
Right –5 –40 25 Limbic Lobe Posterior Cingulate BA 23 58
Left –45 –20 –30 Temporal Lobe Fusiform Gyrus BA 20 59
Left –60 –20 –15 Temporal Lobe Middle Temporal Gyrus BA 21 60
Right 60 –15 –15 Temporal Lobe Middle Temporal Gyrus BA 21 61
Left –45 –55 –15 Temporal Lobe Fusiform Gyrus BA 37 62
Right 45 –55 –15 Temporal Lobe Fusiform Gyrus BA 37 63
Left –40 15 –30 Temporal Lobe Superior Temporal Gyrus BA 38 64
Right 40 15 –30 Temporal Lobe Superior Temporal Gyrus BA 38 65
Right 45 –65 25 Temporal Lobe Middle Temporal Gyrus BA 39 66
Left –45 –65 25 Temporal Lobe Middle Temporal Gyrus BA 39 67
Left –45 –30 10 Temporal Lobe Transverse Temporal Gyrus BA 41 68
Right 55 –20 5 Temporal Lobe Superior Temporal Gyrus BA 41 69
Left –55 –25 5 Temporal Lobe Superior Temporal Gyrus BA 41 70
Right 45 –30 10 Temporal Lobe Transverse Temporal Gyrus BA 41 71
Left –60 –10 15 Temporal Lobe Transverse Temporal Gyrus BA 42 72
Left –60 –25 10 Temporal Lobe Superior Temporal Gyrus BA 42 73
Right 60 –10 15 Temporal Lobe Transverse Temporal Gyrus BA 42 74
Right 65 –25 10 Temporal Lobe Superior Temporal Gyrus BA 42 75
Right 15 –85 0 Occipital Lobe Lingual Gyrus BA 17 76
Right 10 –90 0 Occipital Lobe Lingual Gyrus BA 17 77
Left –10 –90 0 Occipital Lobe Lingual Gyrus BA 17 78
Left –15 –85 0 Occipital Lobe Lingual Gyrus BA 17 79
Left –25 –75 10 Occipital Lobe Cuneus BA 30 80
Right 10 –60 5 Occipital Lobe Cuneus BA 30 81
Right 25 –75 10 Occipital Lobe Cuneus BA 30 82
Right 40 –5 10 Sub-lobar Insula BA 13 83
Left –40 –10 10 Sub-lobar Insula BA 13 84
References
[1]
Bernard BP, Putz-Anderson V, Burt SE, Cole LL, Fairfield-Estill C, Fine LJ, et al. Musculoskeletal Disorders and Workplace Factors: A Critical Review of Epidemiological Evidence for Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders of the Neck, Upper Extremity, and Low Back. 1997. Available at: https://certisafety.com/pdf/mdwf97-141.pdf (Accessed: 18 February 2021).
[2]
Snook SH. The design of manual handling tasks. Ergonomics. 1978; 21: 963–985.
[3]
Chaffin DB, Herrin GD, Keyserling WM. Preemployment strength testing: an updated position. Journal of Occupational Medicine. 1978; 20: 403–408.
[4]
Kamon E, Goldfuss AJ. In-plant evaluation of the muscle strength of workers. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 1978; 39: 801–807.
[5]
Chaffin D, Andersson G, Martin B. Occupational biomechanics. Wiley: New York. 1999.
[6]
Borg G. Physical performance and perceived exertion. Univer. Lund.: Lund. 1962.
[7]
Marcora S. Effort: perception of. In: Goldstein, E. Bruce.2010. ed. Encyclopedia of Perception (pp. 380–383). SAGE Publications Inc.: Los Angeles. 2010.
[8]
Stevens SS. On the psychophysical law. Psychological Review. 1957; 64: 153–181.
[9]
Robertson RJ, Noble BJ. Perception of physical exertion: methods, mediators, and applications. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews. 1997; 25: 407–452.
[10]
Comani S, Di Fronso S, Filho E, Castronovo AM, Schmid M, et al. Attentional Focus and Functional Connectivity in Cycling: An EEG Case Study (pp. 137–140). XIII Mediterranean Conference on Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing. Seville, Spain. 25-28 September 2013. Springer: Cham. 2013.
[11]
Marcora SM, Staiano W. The limit to exercise tolerance in humans: mind over muscle? European Journal of Applied Physiology. 2010; 109: 763–770.
[12]
Pageaux B, Marcora SM, Rozand V, Lepers R. Mental fatigue induced by prolonged self-regulation does not exacerbate central fatigue during subsequent whole-body endurance exercise. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2015; 9: 67.
[13]
Xing X, Zhong B, Luo H, Rose T, Li J, Antwi-Afari MF, Effects of physical fatigue on the induction of mental fatigue of construction workers: A pilot study based on a neurophysiological approach. Automation in Construction. 2020; 120: 103381.
[14]
Borg G. Perceived exertion as an indicator of somatic stress. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 1970; 2: 92–98.
[15]
Borg GA. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 1982; 14: 377–381.
[16]
Borg G. Borg’s Perceived Exertion and Pain Scales. Human Kinetics: Champaign. 1998.
[17]
Gamberale F. Perception of effort in manual materials handling. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health. 1990; 16 Suppl 1: 59–66.
[18]
Karwowski W. Psychophysical acceptability and perception of load heaviness by females. Ergonomics. 1991; 34: 487–496.
[19]
Richard L. On the psychology of passenger comfort. In Oborne DJ, Levis JA (eds) Human Factors in Transport Research (pp. 15–23). London Academic Press: London. 1980.
[20]
Hernandez L, Alhemood A, Genaidy AM, Karwowski W. Evaluation of different scales for measurement of perceived physical strain during performance of manual tasks. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics: JOSE. 2002; 8: 413–432.
[21]
Alessandro N, Nicola C, Mariarosaria V, Rosaria C. New trend line of research about comfort evaluation: proposal of a framework for weighing and evaluating contributes coming from cognitive, postural and physiologic comfort perceptions. AHFE Conference: Cracovia, Poland. 19–23 July 2014. AHFE: Cracovia. 2014.
[22]
Karwowski W, Siemionow W, Gielo-Perczak K. Physical neuroergonomics: The human brain in control of physical work activities. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science. 2003; 4: 175–199.
[23]
Shortz AE, Van Dyke S, Mehta RK. Neural Correlates of Physical and Mental Fatigue. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. Boston, MA, USA, 22–26 October 2012. SAGE Publications Inc.: Los Angeles. 2012.
[24]
Parasuraman R, Rizzo M. Neuroergonomics: The brain at work. Oxford University Press: Oxford. 2006.
[25]
Parasuraman R, Wilson GF. Putting the brain to work: neuroergonomics past, present, and future. Human Factors. 2008; 50: 468–474.
[26]
Parasuraman R. Neuroergonomics: Research and practice. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science. 2003; 4: 5–20.
[27]
Mehta RK, Parasuraman R. Neuroergonomics: a review of applications to physical and cognitive work. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2013; 7: 889.
[28]
Teplan M. Fundamentals of EEG measurement. Measurement Science Review. 2002; 2: 1–11.
[29]
Beres AM. Time is of the Essence: A Review of Electroencephalography (EEG) and Event-Related Brain Potentials (ERPs) in Language Research. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback. 2017; 42: 247–255.
[30]
Henry JC. Electroencephalography: Basic Principles, Clinical Applications, and Related Fields, Fifth Edition. Neurology. 2006; 67: 2092–2092.
[31]
Burle B, Spieser L, Roger C, Casini L, Hasbroucq T, Vidal F. Spatial and temporal resolutions of EEG: Is it really black and white? A scalp current density view. International Journal of Psychophysiology: Official Journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology. 2015; 97: 210–220.
[32]
Park JL, Fairweather MM, Donaldson DI. Making the case for mobile cognition: EEG and sports performance. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 2015; 52: 117–130.
[33]
Chowdhury A, Shankaran R, Kavakli M, Haque M. Sensor Applications and Physiological Features in Drivers’ Drowsiness Detection: A Review. IEEE Sensors Journal. 2018; 18: 3055–3067.
[34]
Gramann K, Plank M. The Use of Electroencephalography in Neuroergonomics. In Ayaz H, Dehais F (eds) Neuroergonomics (pp. 11-15). Academic Press: Cambridge. 2019.
[35]
Maceri RM, Cherup NP, Hanson NJ. EEG Responses to incremental self-paced cycling exercise in young and middle aged adults,” International Journal of Exercise Science. 2019; 12: 800–810.
[36]
Mima T, Steger J, Schulman AE, Gerloff C, Hallett M. Electroencephalographic measurement of motor cortex control of muscle activity in humans. Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. 2000; 111: 326–337.
[37]
Kubitz KA, Pothakos K. Does Aerobic Exercise Decrease Brain Activation? Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology. 1997; 19: 291–301.
[38]
Shibata M, Shimura M, Shibata S, Wakamura T, Moritani T. Determination of the optimal walking speed for neural relaxation in healthy elderly women using electromyogram and electroencephalogram analyses. European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology. 1997; 75: 206–211.
[39]
Mechau D, Mücke S, Weiss M, Liesen H. Effect of increasing running velocity on electroencephalogram in a field test. European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology. 1998; 78: 340–345.
[40]
Moraes H, Deslandes A, Silveira H, Ribeiro P, Cagy M, Piedade R, et al. The effect of acute effort on EEG in healthy young and elderly subjects. European Journal of Applied Physiology. 2011; 111: 67–75.
[41]
Crabbe JB, Dishman RK. Brain electrocortical activity during and after exercise: a quantitative synthesis. Psychophysiology. 2004; 41: 563–574.
[42]
Woo M, Kim S, Kim J, Petruzzello SJ, Hatfield BD. Examining the exercise-affect dose-response relationship: does duration influence frontal EEG asymmetry? International Journal of Psychophysiology: Official Journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology. 2009; 72: 166–172.
[43]
Hall EE, Ekkekakis P, Van Landuyt LM, Petruzzello SJ. Resting frontal asymmetry predicts self-selected walking speed but not affective responses to a short walk. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2000; 71: 74–79.
[44]
Wang Y, Cao L, Hao D, Rong Y, Yang L, Zhang S, et al. Effects of force load, muscle fatigue and extremely low frequency magnetic stimulation on EEG signals during side arm lateral raise task. Physiological Measurement. 2017; 38: 745–758.
[45]
Chaire A, Becke A, and Düzel E. Effects of Physical Exercise on Working Memory and Attention-Related Neural Oscillations. Frontiers in Neuroscience. 2020; 14: 239.
[46]
Moraes H, Ferreira C, Deslandes A, Cagy M, Pompeu F, Ribeiro P, et al. Beta and alpha electroencephalographic activity changes after acute exercise. Arquivos De Neuro-psiquiatria. 2007; 65: 637–641.
[47]
Bailey SP, Hall EE, Folger SE, Miller PC. Changes in EEG during graded exercise on a recumbent cycle ergometer. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine. 2008; 7: 505–511.
[48]
Kubitz KA, Mott AA. EEG power spectral densities during and after cycle ergometer exercise. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1996; 67: 91–96.
[49]
Wroughton J, Cole T. Distinguishing Between Binomial, Hypergeometric and Negative Binomial Distributions. Journal of Statistics Education. 2013; 21: 1–16.
[50]
Mihailoff GA, Haines DE. Fundamental Neuroscience for Basic and Clinical Applications. Elsevier Health Sciences: Amsterdam. 2017.
[51]
Schneider S, Askew CD, Abel T, Mierau A, Strüder HK. Brain and exercise: a first approach using electrotomography. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 2010; 42: 600–607.
[52]
Enders H, Cortese F, Maurer C, Baltich J, Protzner AB, Nigg BM. Changes in cortical activity measured with EEG during a high-intensity cycling exercise. Journal of Neurophysiology. 2016; 115: 379–388.
[53]
Schneider S, Brümmer V, Abel T, Askew CD, Strüder HK. Changes in brain cortical activity measured by EEG are related to individual exercise preferences. Physiology & Behavior. 2009; 98: 447–452.
[54]
Coan JA, Allen JJB. Frontal EEG asymmetry as a moderator and mediator of emotion. Biological Psychology. 2004; 67: 7–49.
[55]
Nielsen B, Nybo L. Cerebral changes during exercise in the heat. Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.). 2003; 33: 1–11.
[56]
Nybo L, Nielsen B. Perceived exertion is associated with an altered brain activity during exercise with progressive hyperthermia. Journal of Applied Physiology (Bethesda, Md.: 1985). 2001; 91: 2017–2023.
[57]
Hallett M. Volitional control of movement: the physiology of free will. Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. 2007; 118: 1179–1192.
[58]
Berchicci M, Menotti F, Macaluso A, Di Russo F. The neurophysiology of central and peripheral fatigue during sub-maximal lower limb isometric contractions. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2013; 7: 135.
[59]
Robertson CV, Marino FE. A role for the prefrontal cortex in exercise tolerance and termination. Journal of Applied Physiology (Bethesda, Md.: 1985). 2016; 120: 464–466.
[60]
Guo F, Sun Y, Zhang R. Perceived exertion during muscle fatigue as reflected in movement-related cortical potentials: an event-related potential study. Neuroreport. 2017; 28: 115–122.
[61]
Lotze M, Montoya P, Erb M, Hülsmann E, Flor H, Klose U, et al. Activation of cortical and cerebellar motor areas during executed and imagined hand movements: an fMRI study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 1999; 11: 491–501.
[62]
Haggard P. Neuroscience. The sources of human volition. Science (New York, N.Y.). 2009; 324: 731–733.
[63]
Zaepffel M, Trachel R, Kilavik BE, Brochier T. Modulations of EEG beta power during planning and execution of grasping movements. PLoS ONE. 2013; 8: e60060.
[64]
Slobounov S, Hallett M, Newell KM. Perceived effort in force production as reflected in motor-related cortical potentials. Clinical Neurophysiology. 2004; 115: 2391–2402.
[65]
de Morree HM, Klein C, Marcora SM. Perception of effort reflects central motor command during movement execution. Psychophysiology. 2012; 49: 1242–1253.
[66]
Desmurget M, Reilly KT, Richard N, Szathmari A, Mottolese C, Sirigu A. Movement intention after parietal cortex stimulation in humans. Science (New York, N.Y.). 2009; 324: 811–813.
[67]
Enoka RM, Stuart DG. Neurobiology of muscle fatigue. Journal of Applied Physiology (Bethesda, Md.: 1985). 1992; 72: 1631–1648.
[68]
Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Chandler J, Welch VA, Higgins JP, et al. Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2019; 10: ED000142.
[69]
Jackson AS. Preemployment physical evaluation. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews. 1994; 22: 53–90.
[70]
Mital A, Kumar S. Human muscle strength definitions, measurement, and usage: Part I — Guidelines for the practitioner. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 1998; 22: 101–121.
[71]
Reis PMR, Hebenstreit F, Gabsteiger F, von Tscharner V, Lochmann M. Methodological aspects of EEG and body dynamics measurements during motion. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2014; 8: 156.
[72]
Islam MK, Rastegarnia A, Yang Z. Methods for artifact detection and removal from scalp EEG: A review. Neurophysiologie Clinique. 2016; 46: 287–305.
[73]
CGX software. https://www.cgxsystems.com/software (Accessed: 12 December 2020).
[74]
Chang C, Hsu S, Pion-Tonachini L, Jung T. Evaluation of Artifact Subspace Reconstruction for Automatic EEG Artifact Removal. Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference. 2018; 2018: 1242–1245.
[75]
Palmer J, Kreutz-Delgado K, Makeig S. AMICA: An Adaptive Mixture of Independent Component Analyzers with Shared Components. San Diego, CA Tech. report, Swart. Cent. Comput. Neurosci., no. December 2014, pp. 1–15, 2011, [Online]. Available at: https://sccn.ucsd.edu/~jason/amica_web.html (Accessed: 4 March 2021).
[76]
Delorme A, Makeig S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods. 2004; 134: 9–21.
[77]
Pascual-Marqui RD, Esslen M, Kochi K, Lehmann D. Functional imaging with low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (LORETA): a review. Methods and Findings in Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology. 2002; 24 Suppl C: 91–95.
[78]
Pascual-Marqui RD, Lehmann D, Koukkou M, Kochi K, Anderer P, Saletu B, et al. Assessing interactions in the brain with exact low-resolution electromagnetic tomography. Philosophical Transactions. Series A, Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences. 2011; 369: 3768–3784.
[79]
Fuchs M, Kastner J, Wagner M, Hawes S, Ebersole JS. A standardized boundary element method volume conductor model. Clinical Neurophysiology. 2002; 113: 702–712.
[80]
Mazziotta J, Toga A, Evans A, Fox P, Lancaster J, Zilles K, et al. A probabilistic atlas and reference system for the human brain: International Consortium for Brain Mapping (ICBM). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences. 2001; 356: 1293–1322.
[81]
Lancaster JL, Woldorff MG, Parsons LM, Liotti M, Freitas CS, Rainey L, et al. Automated Talairach atlas labels for functional brain mapping. Human Brain Mapping. 2000; 10: 120–131.
[82]
Pascual-Marqui RD. Discrete, 3D distributed, linear imaging methods of electric neuronal activity. Part 1: exact, zero error localization. 2007. Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/0710.3341 (Accessed: 14 January 2020).
[83]
Pascual-Marqui RD, Biscay RJ, Valdes-Sosa PA, Bosch-Bayard J, Riera-Diaz JJ. Cortical current source connectivity by means of partial coherence fields. arXiv. 2011. [preprint].
[84]
Brett M, Johnsrude IS, Owen AM. The problem of functional localization in the human brain. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience. 2002; 3: 243–249.
[85]
Canuet L, Tellado I, Couceiro V, Fraile C, Fernandez-Novoa L, Ishii R, et al. Resting-state network disruption and APOE genotype in Alzheimer’s disease: a lagged functional connectivity study. PLoS ONE. 2012; 7: e46289.
[86]
Hata M, Kazui H, Tanaka T, Ishii R, Canuet L, Pascual-Marqui RD, et al. Functional connectivity assessed by resting state EEG correlates with cognitive decline of Alzheimer’s disease - An eLORETA study. Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. 2016; 127: 1269–1278.
[87]
Canuet L, Ishii R, Pascual-Marqui RD, Iwase M, Kurimoto R, Aoki Y, et al. Resting-state EEG source localization and functional connectivity in schizophrenia-like psychosis of epilepsy. PLoS ONE. 2011; 6: e27863.
[88]
Di Lorenzo G, Daverio A, Ferrentino F, Santarnecchi E, Ciabattini F, Monaco L, et al. Altered resting-state EEG source functional connectivity in schizophrenia: the effect of illness duration. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2015; 9: 234.
[89]
Shreekantiah Umesh D, Tikka SK, Goyal N, Nizamie SH, Sinha VK. Resting state theta band source distribution and functional connectivity in remitted schizophrenia. Neuroscience Letters. 2016; 630: 199–202.
[90]
Olbrich S, Olbrich H, Adamaszek M, Jahn I, Hegerl U, Stengler K. Altered EEG lagged coherence during rest in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. 2013; 124: 2421–2430.
[91]
Lanzone J, Imperatori C, Assenza G, Ricci L, Farina B, Di Lazzaro V, et al. Power Spectral Differences between Transient Epileptic and Global Amnesia: An eLORETA Quantitative EEG Study. Brain Sciences. 2020; 10: 613.
[92]
Dai Z, de Souza J, Lim J, Ho PM, Chen Y, Li J, et al. EEG Cortical Connectivity Analysis of Working Memory Reveals Topological Reorganization in Theta and Alpha Bands. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2017; 11: 237.
[93]
Jatoi MA, Kamel N, Malik AS, Faye I. EEG based brain source localization comparison of sLORETA and eLORETA. Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine. 2014; 37: 713–721.
[94]
Holmes AP, Blair RC, Watson JD, Ford I. Nonparametric analysis of statistic images from functional mapping experiments. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism: Official Journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism. 1996; 16: 7–22.
[95]
Kitaura Y, Nishida K, Yoshimura M, Mii H, Katsura K, Ueda S, et al. Functional localization and effective connectivity of cortical theta and alpha oscillatory activity during an attention task. Clinical Neurophysiology Practice. 2017; 2: 193–200.
[96]
Faw B. Pre-frontal executive committee for perception, working memory, attention, long-term memory, motor control, and thinking: a tutorial review. Consciousness and Cognition. 2003; 12: 83–139.
[97]
Palmiero M, Piccardi L. Frontal EEG Asymmetry of Mood: A Mini-Review. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. 2017; 11: 224.
[98]
Umeda S. Emotion, Personality, and the Frontal Lobe. In Watanabe S, Kuczaj S (eds) Emotions of Animals and Humans (pp. 223–241). Springer: Tokyo. 2012.
[99]
Mikkelsen K, Stojanovska L, Polenakovic M, Bosevski M, Apostolopoulos V. Exercise and mental health. Maturitas. 2017; 106: 48–56.
[100]
Ekkekakis P, Petruzzello SJ. Acute aerobic exercise and affect: current status, problems and prospects regarding dose-response. Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.). 1999; 28: 337–374.
[101]
Schneider S, Askew CD, Diehl J, Mierau A, Kleinert J, Abel T, et al. EEG activity and mood in health orientated runners after different exercise intensities. Physiology & Behavior. 2009; 96: 709–716.
[102]
Abeln V, Schneider S, Knicker A, Schiffer W, Hollmann T, Strüder HK. Electrocortical and Hemodynamic Changes within the Brain during Incremental Bicycle Exercise in Normoxia and Hypoxia—A Combined EEG/NIRS Study. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2015; 3: 105–116.
[103]
Hyvärinen J, Laakso M, Roine R, Leinonen L. Comparison of effects of pentobarbital and ethanol on the neuronal activity in the posterior parietal association cortex. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica. 1979; 107: 219–225.
[104]
Heim S, Amunts K, Hensel T, Grande M, Huber W, Binkofski F, et al. The Role of Human Parietal Area 7A as a Link between Sequencing in Hand Actions and in Overt Speech Production. Frontiers in Psychology. 2012; 3: 534.
[105]
Vogt BA, Laureys S. Posterior cingulate, precuneal and retrosplenial cortices: cytology and components of the neural network correlates of consciousness. Progress in Brain Research. 2005; 150: 205–217.
[106]
Fontes EB, Okano AH, De Guio F, Schabort EJ, Min LL, Basset FA, et al. Brain activity and perceived exertion during cycling exercise: an fMRI study. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2015; 49: 556–560.
[107]
Ismail L, Karwowski W, Farahani FV, Rahman M, Alhujailli A, Fernandez-Sumano R, et al. Modeling Brain Functional Connectivity Patterns during an Isometric Arm Force Exertion Task at Different Levels of Perceived Exertion: A Graph Theoretical Approach. Brain Sciences. 2022; 12: 1575.

Publisher’s Note: IMR Press stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share
Back to top
J. Integr. Neurosci. Print ISSN 0219-6352 Electronic ISSN 1757-448X
Disclaimer
We use cookies on our website to ensure you get the best experience.
Read more about our cookies here
Accept