No observation of DIANA signals in rats at 7.0 and 17.2 Tesla

M. Cloos, E. Selingue, Shota Hodono, Romain Gaudin, Luisa Ciobanu
{"title":"No observation of DIANA signals in rats at 7.0 and 17.2 Tesla","authors":"M. Cloos, E. Selingue, Shota Hodono, Romain Gaudin, Luisa Ciobanu","doi":"10.1162/imag_a_00136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Recently, a new method was introduced to detect neuronal activity using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). The method, referred to as DIANA, showed MRI signals with millisecond temporal resolution that correlated with local field potentials measured invasively in mice. Troublingly, attempts by other groups to detect the DIANA signals in humans at 7 Tesla and mice at 15.2 Tesla have failed. So far, attempts to reproduce DIANA in small rodents have focused on paradigms using whisker pad stimulation, which were expected to produce a 0.1–0.15% signal change. However, the Supplementary Material accompanying the original DIANA paper showed that visual stimulation produced a three times larger signal, which should be much easier to detect. Therefore, we attempted to find the DIANA signal in rats using a visual stimulation paradigm. Experiments were performed at 17.2 Tesla but also at 7.0 Tesla to see if the DIANA signal appears at a lower field strength where T2 is longer and BOLD contributions are reduced. In addition, simulations were performed to investigate the theoretical detectability of synthetic DIANA signals in noisy data. Although our data indicated that a 0.1% signal change would have been detectable, we did not observe a DIANA signal. We did observe neuronally driven hemodynamic signal variations that were much larger than the anticipated DIANA signal. The amplitude of these signal changes was relatively similar at 7.0 and 17.2 Tesla (0.7% vs 1.1%). Numerical simulations indicated, however, that the measured hemodynamic signal changes would not interfere with the detection of DIANA signals. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that measurements at higher field strength with improved SNR would have a better chance to detect the DIANA signal. Yet, we, among others, were unable to find it.","PeriodicalId":507939,"journal":{"name":"Imaging Neuroscience","volume":"221 ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Imaging Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/imag_a_00136","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Recently, a new method was introduced to detect neuronal activity using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). The method, referred to as DIANA, showed MRI signals with millisecond temporal resolution that correlated with local field potentials measured invasively in mice. Troublingly, attempts by other groups to detect the DIANA signals in humans at 7 Tesla and mice at 15.2 Tesla have failed. So far, attempts to reproduce DIANA in small rodents have focused on paradigms using whisker pad stimulation, which were expected to produce a 0.1–0.15% signal change. However, the Supplementary Material accompanying the original DIANA paper showed that visual stimulation produced a three times larger signal, which should be much easier to detect. Therefore, we attempted to find the DIANA signal in rats using a visual stimulation paradigm. Experiments were performed at 17.2 Tesla but also at 7.0 Tesla to see if the DIANA signal appears at a lower field strength where T2 is longer and BOLD contributions are reduced. In addition, simulations were performed to investigate the theoretical detectability of synthetic DIANA signals in noisy data. Although our data indicated that a 0.1% signal change would have been detectable, we did not observe a DIANA signal. We did observe neuronally driven hemodynamic signal variations that were much larger than the anticipated DIANA signal. The amplitude of these signal changes was relatively similar at 7.0 and 17.2 Tesla (0.7% vs 1.1%). Numerical simulations indicated, however, that the measured hemodynamic signal changes would not interfere with the detection of DIANA signals. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that measurements at higher field strength with improved SNR would have a better chance to detect the DIANA signal. Yet, we, among others, were unable to find it.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在 7.0 和 17.2 特斯拉条件下,大鼠体内未观察到 DIANA 信号
摘要 最近推出了一种利用磁共振成像(MRI)检测神经元活动的新方法。这种方法被称为 DIANA,它显示的磁共振成像信号具有毫秒级的时间分辨率,与在小鼠体内有创测得的局部场电位相关。令人担忧的是,其他研究小组尝试在 7 特斯拉下的人体和 15.2 特斯拉下的小鼠体内检测 DIANA 信号,但均以失败告终。迄今为止,在小型啮齿类动物中重现 DIANA 的尝试主要集中在使用须垫刺激的范例上,这种刺激预计会产生 0.1-0.15% 的信号变化。然而,DIANA 原始论文所附的补充材料显示,视觉刺激产生的信号要大三倍,应该更容易检测到。因此,我们尝试使用视觉刺激范式在大鼠体内寻找 DIANA 信号。实验在 17.2 特斯拉和 7.0 特斯拉下进行,以观察 DIANA 信号是否出现在 T2 较长、BOLD 贡献减少的较低场强下。此外,我们还进行了模拟,以研究在噪声数据中合成 DIANA 信号的理论可探测性。尽管我们的数据表明 0.1% 的信号变化是可以检测到的,但我们并没有观察到 DIANA 信号。我们确实观察到了神经元驱动的血液动力学信号变化,这些变化比预期的 DIANA 信号要大得多。这些信号变化的幅度在 7.0 特斯拉和 17.2 特斯拉时相对相似(0.7% 对 1.1%)。然而,数值模拟表明,测量到的血液动力学信号变化不会干扰 DIANA 信号的检测。因此,我们有理由相信,在更高场强和更高信噪比下进行的测量更有可能检测到 DIANA 信号。然而,我们等人却未能发现它。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Optimization and validation of multi-echo, multi-contrast SAGE acquisition in fMRI BOLD fMRI responses to amplitude-modulated sounds across age in adult listeners Developmental trajectories of the default mode, frontoparietal, and salience networks from the third trimester through the newborn period GABA levels decline with age: A longitudinal study Unveiling hidden sources of dynamic functional connectome through a novel regularized blind source separation approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1