New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Superslow Brain Waves May Play a Critical Role in Consciousness

Signals long thought to be “noise” appear to represent a distinct form of brain activity

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Every few seconds a wave of electrical activity travels through the brain, like a large swell moving through the ocean. Scientists first detected these ultraslow undulations decades ago in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scans of people and other animals at rest—but the phenomenon was thought to be either electrical “noise” or the sum of much faster brain signals and was largely ignored.

Now a study that measured these “infraslow” (less than 0.1 hertz) brain waves in mice suggests they are a distinct type of brain activity that depends on an animal's conscious state. But big questions remain about these waves' origin and function.

An fMRI scan detects changes in blood flow that are assumed to be linked to neural activity. “When you put someone in a scanner, if you just look at the signal when you don't ask the subject to do anything, it looks pretty noisy,” says Marcus Raichle, a professor of radiology and neurology at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and senior author of the new study, published in April in Neuron. “All this resting-state activity brought to the forefront: What is this fMRI signal all about?”


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


To find out what was going on in the brain, Raichle's team employed a combination of calcium/hemoglobin imaging, which uses fluorescent molecules to detect the activity of neurons at the cellular level, and electrophysiology, which can record signals from cells in different brain layers. They performed both measurements in awake and anesthetized mice; the awake mice were resting in tiny hammocks in a dark room.

The team found that infraslow waves traveled through the cortical layers of the awake rodents' brains—and changed direction when the animals were anesthetized. The researchers say these waves are distinct from so-called delta waves (between 1 and 4 Hz) and other higher-frequency brain activity.

These superslow waves may be critical to how the brain functions, Raichle says. “Think of, say, waves on the water of Puget Sound. You can have very rough days where you have these big groundswells and then have whitecaps sitting on top of them,” he says. These “swells” make it easier for brain areas to become active—for “whitecaps” to form, in other words.

Other researchers praised the study's general approach but were skeptical that it shows the infraslow waves are totally distinct from other brain activity. “I would caution against jumping to a conclusion that resting-state fMRI is measuring some other property of the brain that's got nothing to do with the higher-frequency fluctuations between areas of the cortex,” says Elizabeth Hillman, a professor of biomedical engineering at Columbia University's Zuckerman Institute, who was not involved in the work. Hillman published a study in 2016 finding that resting-state fMRI signals represent neural activity across a range of frequencies, not just low ones.

More studies are needed to tease apart how these different types of brain signals are related. “These kinds of patterns are very new,” Hillman notes. “We haven't got much of a clue what they are, and figuring out what they are is really, really difficult.”

Tanya Lewis was formerly senior desk editor for health and medicine at Scientific American. She wrote and edited stories for the website and print magazine on topics ranging from COVID to organ transplants. She also appeared on Scientific American’s podcast Science Quickly and wrote Scientific American’s weekly Health & Medicine newsletter. She held a number of positions over her nearly 10 years at Scientific American, including health editor, assistant news editor and associate editor at Scientific American Mind. Previously, she has written for outlets that include Insider, Wired, Science News and others. She has a degree in biomedical engineering from Brown University and one in science communication from the University of California, Santa Cruz. Follow her on Bluesky @tanyalewis.bsky.social

More by Tanya Lewis
Scientific American Magazine Vol 319 Issue 1This article was published with the title “Thinking Slow” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 319 No. 1 (), p. 19
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0718-19

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe