The relationship between spatial configuration and functional connectivity of brain regions revisited

  1. Janine Diane Bijsterbosch  Is a corresponding author
  2. Christian F Beckmann
  3. Mark W Woolrich
  4. Stephen M Smith
  5. Samuel J Harrison
  1. University of Oxford, United Kingdom
  2. Radboud University Medical Centre, Netherlands

Abstract

In our previous paper (Bijsterbosch et al., 2018), we showed that network-based modelling of brain connectivity interacts strongly with the shape and exact location of brain regions, such that cross-subject variations in the spatial configuration of functional brain regions are being interpreted as changes in functional connectivity. Here we show that these spatial effects on connectivity estimates actually occur as a result of spatial overlap between brain networks. This is shown to systematically bias connectivity estimates obtained from group spatial ICA followed by dual regression. We introduce an extended method that addresses the bias and achieves more accurate connectivity estimates.

Data availability

Simulation analysis scripts are available on git.Source data files for Figures 1 and 5 will be made available on BALSA (https://balsa.wustl.edu/) upon acceptance.

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Janine Diane Bijsterbosch

    Centre for Functional MRI of the Brain (FMRIB), Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    janine.bijsterbosch@wustl.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1385-9178
  2. Christian F Beckmann

    Donders Institute, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Mark W Woolrich

    Oxford Centre for Human Brain Activity (OHBA), Wellcome Centre for Integrative NeuroImaging, Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Stephen M Smith

    Centre for Functional MRI of the Brain (FMRIB), Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Samuel J Harrison

    Centre for Functional MRI of the Brain (FMRIB), Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5886-2389

Funding

Wellcome (098369/Z/12/Z)

  • Stephen M Smith

Wellcome (091509/Z/10/Z)

  • Stephen M Smith

Wellcome (203139/Z/16/Z)

  • Stephen M Smith

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Chris Honey

Ethics

Human subjects: HCP data were acquired using protocols approved by the Washington University institutional review board (Mapping the Human Connectome: Structure, Function, and Heritability; IRB # 201204036). Informed consent was obtained from subjects. Anonymised data are publicly available from ConnectomeDB (db.humanconnectome.org; Hodge et al., 2016). Certain parts of the dataset used in this study, such as the age of the subjects, are available subject to restricted data usage terms, requiring researchers to ensure that the anonymity of subjects is protected (Van Essen et al., 2013).

Version history

  1. Received: January 14, 2019
  2. Accepted: May 7, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 8, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: May 29, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2019, Bijsterbosch et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,783
    views
  • 419
    downloads
  • 69
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Janine Diane Bijsterbosch
  2. Christian F Beckmann
  3. Mark W Woolrich
  4. Stephen M Smith
  5. Samuel J Harrison
(2019)
The relationship between spatial configuration and functional connectivity of brain regions revisited
eLife 8:e44890.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44890

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44890

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Melody C Iacino, Taylor A Stowe ... Mark J Ferris
    Research Article Updated

    Adolescence is characterized by changes in reward-related behaviors, social behaviors, and decision-making. These behavioral changes are necessary for the transition into adulthood, but they also increase vulnerability to the development of a range of psychiatric disorders. Major reorganization of the dopamine system during adolescence is thought to underlie, in part, the associated behavioral changes and increased vulnerability. Here, we utilized fast scan cyclic voltammetry and microdialysis to examine differences in dopamine release as well as mechanisms that underlie differential dopamine signaling in the nucleus accumbens (NAc) core of adolescent (P28-35) and adult (P70-90) male rats. We show baseline differences between adult and adolescent-stimulated dopamine release in male rats, as well as opposite effects of the α6 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) on modulating dopamine release. The α6-selective blocker, α-conotoxin, increased dopamine release in early adolescent rats, but decreased dopamine release in rats beginning in middle adolescence and extending through adulthood. Strikingly, blockade of GABAA and GABAB receptors revealed that this α6-mediated increase in adolescent dopamine release requires NAc GABA signaling to occur. We confirm the role of α6 nAChRs and GABA in mediating this effect in vivo using microdialysis. Results herein suggest a multisynaptic mechanism potentially unique to the period of development that includes early adolescence, involving acetylcholine acting at α6-containing nAChRs to drive inhibitory GABA tone on dopamine release.

    1. Neuroscience
    Daniel Hoops, Robert Kyne ... Cecilia Flores
    Short Report

    Dopamine axons are the only axons known to grow during adolescence. Here, using rodent models, we examined how two proteins, Netrin-1 and its receptor, UNC5C, guide dopamine axons toward the prefrontal cortex and shape behaviour. We demonstrate in mice (Mus musculus) that dopamine axons reach the cortex through a transient gradient of Netrin-1-expressing cells – disrupting this gradient reroutes axons away from their target. Using a seasonal model (Siberian hamsters; Phodopus sungorus) we find that mesocortical dopamine development can be regulated by a natural environmental cue (daylength) in a sexually dimorphic manner – delayed in males, but advanced in females. The timings of dopamine axon growth and UNC5C expression are always phase-locked. Adolescence is an ill-defined, transitional period; we pinpoint neurodevelopmental markers underlying this period.