Human Left Hemisphere Research Articles

Challenges Facing the Study of the Evolutionary Origins of Human Right-Handedness and Language

A growing consensus favors the predominance of the human left hemisphere in manipulation and language (speech and gestures). However, the mechanisms underlying brain lateralization for noncommunication and communication functions are still unclear. Many studies emphasize the ambiguous nature of the relationship between the directions of brain lateralization for manipulation and for language. A comparative evolutionary approach investigating lateralization and communication mechanisms in our closest living relatives can improve our understanding of human hemispheric specialisation. We review theories concerning the evolutionary origins of human right-handedness and language and studies, highlighting the relevance of a comparative evolutionary approach. We discuss four methodological issues related to the study of handedness and communication: 1) categorisation of signaling based on criteria of intentionality; 2) use of a comprehensive multimodal and multifactorial approach; 3) investigation of laterality in intraspecific gestures; and 4) comparison of manual laterality between gestures and noncommunication actions. Deeper investigations of the multifaceted nature of intentionality in communication and the multidimensionality of manual laterality and communication in humans and other primates are needed. Finally, we make four recommendations to enhance our understanding of the evolutionary origins of human right-handedness and language: 1) implementing a comprehensive and integrated investigation of laterality and communication; 2) considering socioecologically relevant contexts; 3) investigating intraspecific aspects of communication in humans and other primates that vary in their degree of sociality; and 4) using appropriate, standardized methods of data collection and analysis.

Adenosylmethionine Decarboxylase 1 (AMD1)-Mediated mRNA Processing and Cell Adhesion Activated & Inhibited Transition Mechanisms by Different Comparisons Between Chimpanzee and Human Left Hemisphere

To understand adenosylmethionine decarboxylase 1 (AMD1)-mediated mRNA processing and cell adhesion activated & inhibited transition mechanisms between chimpanzee and human left hemisphere, AMD1-activated different complete (all no positive correlation, Pearson correlation coefficient < 0.25) and uncomplete (partly no positive correlation except AMD1, Pearson < 0.25) networks were identified in higher human compared with lower chimpanzee left hemisphere from the corresponding AMD1-stimulated (Pearson ≥ 0.25) or inhibited (Pearson ≤ -0.25) overlapping molecules of Pearson and GRNInfer, respectively. This result was verified by the corresponding scatter matrix. As visualized by GO, KEGG, GenMAPP, BioCarta, and disease database integration, we proposed mainly that AMD1-stimulated different complete network was involved in AMD1 activation with cytoplasm ubiquitin specific peptidase (tRNA-guanine transglycosylase) to nucleus paired box-induced mRNA processing, whereas the corresponding inhibited network participated in AMD1 repression with cytoplasm protocadherin gamma and adaptor-related protein complex 3-induced cell adhesion in lower chimpanzee left hemisphere. However, AMD1-stimulated network contained AMD1 activation with plakophilin and phosphodiesterase to SH3 binding glutamic acid-rich protein to dynein and zinc finger-induced cell adhesion, whereas the corresponding inhibited different complete network included AMD1 repression with mitochondrial denine nucleotide translocator, brain protein, and ADH dehydrogenase to ribonucleoprotein-induced mRNA processing in higher human left hemisphere. Our AMD1 different networks were verified by AMD1-activated or -inhibited complete and uncomplete networks within and between chimpanzee left hemisphere or (and) human left hemisphere.

Hemispheric asymmetry in the fusiform gyrus distinguishes Homo sapiens from chimpanzees

While the neural basis for linguistic communication has been linked to brain structural asymmetries found only in humans (wider connective spacing is found between the minicolumns of neurons in the left hemisphere language areas), it is unknown if the opposite microanatomical asymmetry exists in the fusiform gyrus which typically supports a right hemisphere bias for face processing. Unlike language, face processing is an ability shared with chimpanzees and, as Darwin observed, the widespread use of facial expressions in animal communication suggests a biological basis. We tested the principle that minicolumn asymmetry follows typical functional dominance in humans, and tested its evolutionary continuity, by measuring minicolumn width, neuronal size and density in the mid-fusiform cortex in 14 humans and 14 chimpanzees. We found that microanatomical asymmetry distinguishes humans from chimpanzees although the direction of asymmetry is the same as in language areas-the right hemisphere contained narrower minicolumns and smaller pyramidal neurons, as in auditory language areas. Uniformly narrow minicolumns in chimpanzees and in the human right hemisphere are consistent with mechanistic predictions supporting the apparent bias towards holistic face processing. Wider minicolumns and larger neurons in the human left hemisphere may be consistent with a language function such as word-form processing. Microanatomical asymmetry in the neocortex therefore provides a correlate of hemispheric specialisation.

Perisylvian white matter connectivity in the human right hemisphere

BackgroundBy using diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging (DTI) and subsequent tractography, a perisylvian language network in the human left hemisphere recently has been identified connecting Brocas's and Wernicke's areas directly (arcuate fasciculus) and indirectly by a pathway through the inferior parietal cortex.ResultsApplying DTI tractography in the present study, we found a similar three-way pathway in the right hemisphere of 12 healthy individuals: a direct connection between the superior temporal and lateral frontal cortex running in parallel with an indirect connection. The latter composed of a posterior segment connecting the superior temporal with the inferior parietal cortex and an anterior segment running from the inferior parietal to the lateral frontal cortex.ConclusionThe present DTI findings suggest that the perisylvian inferior parietal, superior temporal, and lateral frontal corticies are tightly connected not only in the human left but also in the human right hemisphere.

What Puts the How in Where? Tool Use and the Divided Visual Streams Hypothesis

An influential theory suggests that the dorsal (occipito-parietal) visual stream computes representations of objects for purposes of guiding actions (determining ‘how’) independently of ventral (occipito-temporal) stream processes supporting object recognition and semantic processing (determining ‘what’). Yet, the ability of the dorsal stream alone to account for one of the most common forms of human action, tool use, is limited. While experience-dependent modifications to existing dorsal stream representations may explain simple tool use behaviors (e.g., using sticks to extend reach) found among a variety of species, skillful use of manipulable artifacts (e.g., cups, hammers, pencils) requires in addition access to semantic representations of objects' functions and uses. Functional neuroimaging suggests that this latter information is represented in a left-lateralized network of temporal, frontal and parietal areas. I submit that the well-established dominance of the human left hemisphere in the representation of familiar skills stems from the ability for this acquired knowledge to influence the organization of actions within the dorsal pathway.