Brainstem auditory-evoked potentials in two meditative mental states http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2997230/?tool=pubmed

Journal List > Int J > v.3(2); Jul–Dec 2010

IntJYoga.2010Jul–Dec;3(2):37–41. PMCID:PMC2997230 doi:10.4103/09736131.72628.

Copyright©InternationalJournalofYoga

Brainstem auditory-evoked potentials in two meditative mental states

SanjayKumar,HRNagendra,KVNaveen,NKManjunath,andShirleyTelles

DepartmentofYogaResearch,IndianCouncilofMedicalResearchCenterforAdvancedResearchinYogaand Neurophysiology,SVYASA,Bangalore,India Address for correspondence: Dr.ShirleyTelles,Yogpeeth,MaharishiDayanandGram,Bahadrabad,Haridwar249 402,Uttarakhand,India.Email:[email protected]

ThisisanopenaccessarticledistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsAttributionLicense,whichpermits unrestricteduse,distribution,andreproductioninanymedium,providedtheoriginalworkisproperlycited.

Abstract

Context: Practicingmentalrepetitionof“”hasbeenshowntocausesignificantchangesinthemiddle latencyauditoryevokedpotentials,whichsuggeststhatitfacilitatestheneuralactivityatthe mesencephalicordiencephaliclevels.

Aims: Theaimofthestudywastostudythebrainstemauditoryevokedpotentials(BAEP)intwo statesbasedonconsciousness,viz. dharana ,and dhyana .

Materials and Methods: Thirtysubjectswereselected,withagesrangingfrom20to55years(M=29.1;±SD=6.5years) whohadaminimumof6monthsexperienceinmeditating“OM”.Eachsubjectwasassessedin foursessions,i.e.twomeditationandtwocontrolsessions.Thetwocontrolsessionswere:(i) ekagrata ,i.e.singletopiclectureonmeditationand(ii)cancalata ,i.e.nontargetedthinking.The twomeditationsessionswere:(i) dharana ,i.e.focusingonthesymbol“OM”and(ii) dhyana ,i.e. effortlesssinglethoughtstate“OM”.Allfoursessionswererecordedonfourdifferentdaysand consistedofthreestates,i.e.pre,duringandpost.

Results: ThepresentresultsshowedthatthewaveVpeaklatencysignificantlyincreasedin cancalata , ekagrata and dharana ,butnochangeoccurredduringthe dhyana session.

Conclusions: Theseresultssuggestedthatinformationtransmissionalongtheauditorypathwayisdelayed during cancalata , ekagrata and dharana ,butthereisnochangeduring dhyana .Itmaybesaid thatauditoryinformationtransmissionwasdelayedattheinferiorcollicularlevelasthewaveV correspondstothetectum. Keywords: Brainstemauditoryevokedpotential, cancalata , dharana , dhyana , ekagrata

INTRODUCTION

Thefunctionsofthebraininmeditationhavebeenstudiedusingdifferenttechniques.These includetheelectroencephalogram(EEG),[1]evokedpotentials,[2]regionalcerebralglucose

1 de 7 06/02/2011 19:24 Brainstem auditory-evoked potentials in two meditative mental states http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2997230/?tool=pubmed

utilizationaswellas,morerecently,functionalmagneticresonanceimaging.[3]Amongthese methods,aspecifictechniqueisselectedforeachexperimentaseachofthemhavedifferent spatialandtemporalresolutions.[4]

Evokedpotentialsareusedinmeditationstudiesbecauseacorrelationbetweendifferentevoked potentialcomponentsandunderlyingneuralgeneratorsisreasonablywellworkedout.[5]Apart fromthis,itappearsthatthecerebralcortexisactivelyinvolvedinmeditation.[6]Hence,onemay expectcorticoefferentgatingwithchangesoccurringatthesubcorticalrelaycenters.[7]Forthese reasons,therehavebeenstudiesofshortandmidlatencyauditoryevokedpotentialsduring meditation.Thestudiesonmidlatencyauditoryevokedpotentialshavemostoftenshownchanges inacomponentcalledtheNawave,anegativewaveoccurringbetween14and19msec.The changeshavebeenintheformofanincreaseinamplitude,[8]suggestingtherequirementofmore neurons.Adecreaseinlatencyhasalsobeenreported,[9]suggestingadecreaseintimetakento transmitsensoryinformation.

Studiesonshortlatencyauditoryevokedpotentialshavenotshownsuchclearchanges.[2]Inthat study,brainstemauditoryevokedpotentials(BAEP)weremeasuredinfiveadvancedpractitioners oftranscendentalmeditation(TM)todeterminewhethersuchresponseswouldreflectanincrease inperceptualacuitytoauditorystimulifollowingmeditation.TheBAEPprovideanobjective physiologicalindexofauditoryfunctionatasubcorticallevel.RepeatedmeasuresoftheBAEPof TMpractitionersweretakenbeforeandafteraperiodofmeditationandwerecomparedwith thoseofagematchedcontrols.Peaklatenciesaswellasinterwavelatenciesbetweenmajor BAEPcomponentswereevaluated.Nopre–postmeditationdifferencesforexperimentalsubjects wereobservedatlowstimulusintensities(0–35dB).Atmoderateintensities(40–50dB),the latencyoftheinferiorcollicularwave(waveV)increasedfollowingmeditation.However,athigher stimulusintensities(55–70dB),thelatencyofthiswavewasslightlydecreased.Comparisonof theslopesandinterceptsofstimulusintensity–latencyfunctionsindicateapossibleeffectof meditationonbrainstemactivity.[2]ThisstudyonshortlatencyauditoryevokedpotentialsinTM meditationpractitionersdemonstratedthatshortlatencyauditoryevokedpotentialvarieswith stimuluscharacteristics.

Morerecently,wehaveattemptedtounderstandmeditationbasedondescriptionsfroman ancientyogatext.Thisis Patanjali’syoga ( circa 900BC).[10]Basedonthisdescription, meditationhasbeenconsideredastwostates,namely dharana ,whichischaracterizedby focusingontheobjectofmeditationand dhyana ,whichisadefocusedstateofmental expansiveness.Withthisbackground,thepresentstudywasundertakentodeterminewhether shortlatencyauditoryevokedpotentialswouldchangeinnormalsubjectsinmeditationconsidered asboth dharana and dhyana sessionsonseparatedays.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Subjects Thirtysubjectswereselectedintheagerangebetween20and55years(groupmean±SD, 29.1±6.5years)recruitedfromaresidentialsetup,SwamiVivekanandaYogaResearch Foundation,Bangalore,insouthIndia.Thisagerangewasselectedasshortlatencydoesnotvary withinthisagerangeinhealthyindividuals.[11]Onlymalesubjectswereselectedbecauseithas beendemonstratedthatshortlatencyauditoryevokedpotentialsvarywiththephasesofthe menstrualcycle.[12]Allofthemhadnormalhealthbasedonaroutinecasehistoryandaclinical examination.Also,allofthemhadexperienceofpracticingmeditationforatleast30minperday, 4daysinaweek,foraminimumof1year.Theirmeditationpracticewasbasedonselfreporting ofthemeditatorsaswellas(wherepossible)consultationswiththemeditationteacher( guru ).

2 de 7 06/02/2011 19:24 Brainstem auditory-evoked potentials in two meditative mental states http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2997230/?tool=pubmed

Toassessthequalityofthepractice,visualanaloguescale(VAS)wasusedattheendofeach session.

Allofthemexpressedtheirwillingnesstoparticipateintheexperiment.Theprojectwasapproved bytheInstitution’sEthicsCommittee.Thestudyprotocolwasexplainedtothesubjectsandtheir signedinformedconsentwasobtained.

Apartfromtheirpriorexperienceof“OM”meditation,theyhadundergonea2monthorientation programin“OM”meditationundertheguidanceofanexperiencedmeditationteacher.

Theconditiontoexcludesubjectswereanyhealthdisorder,especiallypsychiatricorneurological disorders,auditorydeficitsassessedbycheckingtheauditorythresholdofeachearseparately andanymedicationthataltersthefunctionsofthenervoussystem.Noneofthesubjectshadtobe excludedforthesereasons.

Theorderofthefoursessions(i.e.twomeditationsessionsandtwononmeditationcontrol sessions)wasrandomizedforeachsubjectusingastandardrandomnumbertable.[13]Thiswas donetopreventtheinfluenceofbeingexposedtothelaboratoryforthefirsttimeforexample, frominfluencingtheresultsamongotherreasons.

Design Eachsubjectwasassessedinfoursessions,i.e.twomeditationandtwocontrolsessions,to recordBAEP.Thetwocontrolsessionswere:(i) ekagrata ,i.e.singletopiclectureonmeditation and(ii) cancalata ,i.e.nontargetedthinking.Thetwomeditationsessionswere:(i) dharana ,i.e. focusingonthesymbol“OM”and(ii) dhyana ,i.e.effortlesssinglethoughtstate“OM.”Allfour sessionsconsistedofthreestates,i.e.“pre”(5min),“during”(20min)and“post”(5min).

Theassessmentsweremadeonfourdifferentdays,notnecessarilyonconsecutivedays,butat thesametimeoftheday(i.e.,theselfascontroldesign).Theallocationofthesubjectstothefour sessionswasrandomizedusingastandardrandomnumbertable.[13]Thiswasdonetoprevent theinfluenceofbeingexposedtothelaboratoryforthefirsttimefrominfluencingtheresults.

Assessments BAEPwererecordedusingtheNicoletBravosystem(NicoletBiomedicals,Madison,WI,USA). Theamplifiersettingswereasfollows:lowfrequencyfilter100Hz,highfrequencyfilter3KHz, sensitivity50 V,numberofsweepsaveraged1,500,sweepwidth10ms,delay0ms.Binaural clickstimuli,ofalternatingpolarity,with11.1Hzfrequencyand100 Sduration,weredelivered throughacousticallyshieldedearphones(Amplivox,Oxfordshire,UK).Thestimulusintensitywas keptat80dBnHL.Therejectionlevelwasexpressedasapercentageofthefullscalerangeof theanalogtodigitalconverter.Thislevelwassetat90%.Silverchloride(Ag/AgCl)disc electrodeswereplacedonthescalpusingaconductivewatersolublepaste.Theactiveelectrode wasatCzaccordingtotheInternational10–20system[14]referencedtolinkedearlobes,withthe groundelectrodeontheforehead(FPz).Allelectrodeimpedanceswerekeptbelow5K throughoutthesession.

Interventions Throughoutallsessions,thesubjectskepttheireyesclosedandfollowedprerecorded instructions.Theinstructionsemphasizedcarryingoutthepracticeslowly,withawarenessand relaxation.Themeditatorswhoparticipatedinthestudyunderwent1monthoforientation sessions,wheretheypracticedtwophasesthatformedacontinuuminmeditation( dharana and dhyana )astwoseparatestatesandtwocontrolstates,i.e. cancalata ornonfocusedthinkingand ekagrata orfocusingwithoutmeditationandonmorethanonethought.

3 de 7 06/02/2011 19:24 Brainstem auditory-evoked potentials in two meditative mental states http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2997230/?tool=pubmed

Thesestatesaredescribedinthetraditionaltexts,i.e.the Patanjali’syogasutras and ,statingthatwhenawakeandintheabsenceofaspecifictask,themindisverydistractible (cancalata ),andhastobetakenthroughthestagesof“streamliningthethoughts”(concentration or ekagrata )beforemovingontothestatesofmeditation.Theseare:onepointedconcentration or dharana andadefocused,effortlesssinglethoughtstateor dhyana .

Inthe cancalata session,the20minperiodconsistedof“nontargetedthinking,”duringwhichthe subjectswereaskedtoallowtheirthoughtstowanderfreelyastheylistenedtoacompiledaudio CDconsistingofbriefperiodsofconversationandtalksonmultipletopicsrecordedfromalocal radiostationtransmission.Inthe ekagrata session,the20minperiodconsistedoffocusingona singletopic,whichwaslisteningtoalectureonmeditation,withmultiple,yetassociated,thoughts. Inthe dharana session,the20minperiodconsistedoffocusingonthesymbol“OM.”Duringthis session,theywereaskedtofocusonthemeaningofthesyllable,OM,whichisusedasasymbol fortheentireuniversebecauseOMisconsideredtorepresent“thatwhichsustains everything.”[15]Inthe dhyana session,the20minofthepracticeconsistedofmeditationwith effortlessabsorptioninthesinglethoughtstateoftheobjectofmeditation,i.e.“OM.”

Forthetwomeditationsessionsandthetwocontrolsessions,subjectsweregivenguided instructionsthroughseparaterecordedinstructionsforeachsession.

Data extraction FortheBAEP,thepeaklatenciesandpeakamplitudesofallsevenwaveswerecalculated.Peak latency(msec)isdefinedasthetimefromstimulusonsettothepointofmaximumpositive amplitudewithinthelatencywindow.Peakamplitude(V)isdefinedasthevoltagedifference betweenaprestimulusbaselineandthelargestpositivegoingpeakwithinagivenlatency window.

Data analysis StatisticalanalysiswasperformedusingSPSS(Version10.0).Thepeaklatenciesandpeak amplitudesofallsevenwaveswereanalyzedusingrepeatedmeasuresanalysesofvariance (ANOVAs)and posthoc analyseswithBonferroniadjustmentwereperformedtocompare“pre” datawith“during”and“post.”

TherepeatedmeasuresANOVAswereperformedwithtwo“within–subject”factors,i.e.Factor1: Sessions;withfourlevels,viz. cancalata , ekagrata , dharana and dhyana ,andFactor2:States; withsixlevels,viz. pre,during(D1toD4)andpost .TheserepeatedmeasuresANOVAswere carriedoutforthepeaklatencyandpeakamplitudeofalllevels.

Thiswasfollowedbya posthoc analysiswithBonferroniadjustmentformultiplecomparisons betweenthemeanvaluesofdifferentstates(pre,during1toduring4andpost).

RESULTS

ThepeaklatencyofwaveVshowedasignificantdifferencebetweenSessions( F=3.894,for df =2.678,77.651, P<0.015,HuynhFeldtepsilon=0.893)andbetweenStates( F=11.713,for df =4.181,121.256, P<0.001,HuynhFeldtepsilon=0.836).

posthoc analysiswithBonferroniadjustmentforeachsession( cancalata , ekagrata , dharana and dhyana )separatelyshowedasignificantincreaseinthelatencyofwaveVduringthe cancalata session(preversusduring,i.e.D2; P=0.042), ekagrata session(preversusduring,i.e.D2; P=0.009,preversusduring,i.e.D3; P=0.026,preversusduring,i.e.D4; P=0.005andpreversus post P=0.001)andfollowingthe dharana session(preversuspost; P=0.018).

4 de 7 06/02/2011 19:24 Brainstem auditory-evoked potentials in two meditative mental states http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2997230/?tool=pubmed

TheamplitudeofwaveValsoshowedasignificantdifferencebetweenSessions( F=6.515,for df =2.692,78.060, P<0.001,HuynhFeldtepsilon=0.897)andbetweenStates( F=8.574,for df =4.292,124.456, P<0.001,HuynhFeldtepsilon=0.858).

posthoc analysiswithBonferroniadjustmentforeachsession( cancalata , ekagrata , dharana and dhyana )separatelyshowednosignificantchangeinthepeakamplitudeofwaveV( P>0.05).Also, therewerenosignificantchangeintheotherwaves( P>0.05).

Hence,thechangesinwaveVpeaklatencyalonearepresentedin Table1.

Table 1 LatencyofwaveVbrainstemauditoryevokedpotentials(BAEP)infoursessions

DISCUSSION

Inthepresentstudy,normalhealthyvolunteerswhowereexperiencedinpracticingmeditationon thesyllable“OM”wereassessedintwomeditation(i.e., dharana and dhyana )andtwocontrol sessions(i.e., cancalata and ekagrata sessions).BAEPwererecordedthroughoutallfour sessions.TherewasasignificantincreaseinthewaveVpeaklatencyduringthe cancalata , ekagrata and dharana sessionsbuttherewasnochangeduringthe dhyana session.

Intheliterature,thereisonlyonepreviousstudyofshortlatencyauditoryevokedpotentialsinTM practitioners.Inthisstudy,atmoderatestimulusintensities(40–50dB),thewaveVlatency increasedfollowingmeditation.[2]Incontrast,athigherstimulusintensities,thewaveVlatency wasslightlydecreasedbyacomparisonoftheslopesandinterceptsofstimulusintensity–latency functions.TheauthorssuggestedapossibleeffectofTMonbrainstemactivity.Inthepresent study,therewasnoattempttovarythestimulusintensity,whichwaskeptatthe80dBnormal hearinglevel.Thiswouldfitinthecategoryofahigherintensitystimulusbasedonthe categorizationinthestudy.[2]Incontrasttothatstudy,evenatthishighstimulusintensity,the latencyofwaveVdidnotdecreaseduringeitherofthetwomeditationsessions( dharana and dhyana ).Incontrast,anincreaseinwaveVpeaklatencywasfoundinthe cancalata , ekagrata and dharana sessions.Nosuchincreasewasobtainedinthe dhyana session.Anincreaseinthe latencyofanevokedpotentialcomponentistakentosuggestthatsensoryinformationprocessing attheleveloftheunderlyingneuralgeneratorisdelayed.[16]Thissuggeststhatinthe cancalata , ekagrata and dharana mentalstates,sensoryprocessingatthemidbrainlevelwasdelayed. Anotherfeatureofthepresentstudyisthatadifferenceisseeninthenatureoftheresultsinthe twomeditationsessions.

Intheintroduction,itwasalreadymentionedthatdharana and dhyana stateshavebeendescribed inanancientyogatext,namely Patanjali’syogasutras .Inthistext, dharana literarymeans“fixing themindonaspecificobject”( Patanjali’syogasutras Chapter3verse1).Themindcouldbefixed onanypointand.aslongasdisturbancesfromanycornerarewardedoff,thismentalstateis called dharana .When dharana becomeseffortless,ittakestheformof dhyana ,whichisdefined astheuninterruptedspontaneousflowofthemindtowardthechosenobject.

Incontrasttothis,thetwocontrolsessions,i.e. cancalata and ekagrata aredescribedinanother ancienttext,the BhagavadGita .[17]The cancalata stateischaracterizedbyconstantshiftingof thoughtsfromoneobjecttoanother.The ekagrata stateisquitedifferentfromthisandissimilarto concentration.Whenhaphazardthoughtsarestreamlinedinasingledirection,itiscalled ekagrata .

5 de 7 06/02/2011 19:24 Brainstem auditory-evoked potentials in two meditative mental states http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2997230/?tool=pubmed

Hence,irrespectiveofwhethermeditatorswereinastateofrandomthinking( cancalata ), channelizedthoughtinconcentration( ekagrata )orinastateofchannelizedthoughtasin meditation( dharana ),therewasadelayinsensoryinformationprocessing,asmentionedaboveat themidbrain(possiblytheinferiorcolliculus)level.Incontrast,whenthementalstatewas characterizedbyalackofeffortin dhyana ,nosuchchangeoccurred.

Furtherstudiesarerequiredtounderstandwhetherneuralrelaycentersfurtheralongtheauditory pathwaywouldalsochangedifferentlyin dharana and dhyana states.Thelimitationsofthe presentstudyare:(i)thefactthattherewasnoattempttovarystimulusintensitiesandhencethe earlierfindingsofMcEvoy,FrumkinandHarkins,[2]couldnotbeexamined,(ii) ekagrata , dharana and cancalata sessionswerenotdifferentandcannotberuledoutastheVASisessentiallya subjectivemeasure;noobjectivemeasurewastaken.Onlythosesubjectswhoachieved75%of theiridealpracticebasedoftheirsubjectiveratingwereincludedinthestudy.Again,thepossibility thatthesoundstimulusinfluencesallfourpracticescannotberuledout.Thisisanotherlimitation ofthestudy.

Despitetheselimitations,thepresentstudydoesdemonstrateadifferencebetweenthe dharana and dhyana statesofmeditationbasedonBAEP.[15,17,18]

REFERENCES

1. BanquetJP.SpectralanalysisoftheEEGinmeditation. ElectroencephalogrClinNeurophysiol. 1973;35:143–51. [PubMed]

2. McEvoyTM,FrumkinLR,HarkinsSW.Effectsofmeditationonbrainstemauditoryevokedpotentials. IntJNeurosci. 1980;10:165–70.[PubMed]

3. LazarSW,KerrCE,WassermanRH,GrayJR,GreveDN,TreadwayMT,etal.Meditationexperienceisassociatedwith increasedcorticalthickness. Neuroreport. 2005;28:1893–7.[PMCfreearticle][PubMed]

4. MishraUK,KalitaJ. Clinicalneurophysiology. NewDelhi:B.I.ChurchillLivingstore;2001.

5. WoodsDL,ClayworthCC.Clickspatialpositioninfluencesmiddlelatencyauditoryevokedpotentials(MAEPs)inhumans. ClinElectroencephalogr. 1985;60:122–9.

6. LazarSW,KerrCE,WassermanRH,GrayJR,GreveDN,TreadwayMT,etal.Meditationexperienceisassociatedwith increasedcorticalthickness. Neuroreport. 2005;28:1893–7.[PMCfreearticle][PubMed]

7. NapadowV,DhondR,ContiG,MakrisN,BrownEN,BarbieriR.Braincorrelatesofautonomicmodulation:Combining heartratevariabilitywithfMRI. Neuroimage. 2008;42:169–77.[PMCfreearticle][PubMed]

8. TellesS,NagarathnaR,NagendraHR.Alterationsinauditorymiddlelatencyevokedpotentialsduringmeditationona meaningfulsymbol–“OM” IntJNeurosci. 1994;76:87–93.[PubMed]

9. TellesS,NaveenKV.Changesinmiddlelatencyauditoryevokedpotentialsduringmeditation. PsycholRep. 2004;94:398–400.[PubMed]

10. TaiminiIK. TheScienceofYoga. Madras,India:TheTheosophicalPublishingHouse;1961.

11. LauterJL,OylerRF,LordMaesJ.Amplitudestabilityofauditorybrainstemresponsesintwogroupsofchildren comparedwithadults. BrJAudiol. 1993;27:263–71.[PubMed]

12. YadavA,TandonOP,VaneyN.Auditoryevokedresponsesduringdifferentphasesofmenstrualcycle. IndianJPhysiol Pharmacol. 2002;46:449–56.[PubMed]

13. ZARJH. Biostatisticalanalysis. 4thed.Delhi,India:PersonEducation(Singapore)Pvt.Ltd;2005.

14. JasperHH.ThetentwentyelectrodesystemoftheInternationalfederation. ElectroencephalogrClinNeurophysiol. 1958;10:371–5.

15. ChinmayanandaS. MandukyaUpanisad. Bombay:Sachinpublishers;1984.

6 de 7 06/02/2011 19:24 Brainstem auditory-evoked potentials in two meditative mental states http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2997230/?tool=pubmed

16. SubramanyaP,TellesS.Changesinmiddlelatencyauditoryevokedpotentialsfollowingtwoyogabasedrelaxation techniques. ClinicalEEGandNeuroscience. 2009;40:190–95.[PubMed]

17. BhakttivedantaSwamiPrabhupadaAC. BhagavadGita:asitis. Mumbai:TheBhaktivedantaBookTrust;1998.

18. TellesS,DesirajuT.Recordingofauditorymiddlelatencyevokedpotentialsduringthepracticeofmeditationwiththe syllable‘OM’ IndianJMedRes. 1993;98:237–9.[PubMed]

Articlesfrom InternationalJournalofYoga areprovidedherecourtesyof Medknow Publications

7 de 7 06/02/2011 19:24