Network Neuroscience最新文献

Progress in scientific disciplines is accompanied by standardization of terminology. Network neuroscience, at the level of macroscale organization of the brain, is beginning to confront the challenges associated with developing a taxonomy of its fundamental explanatory constructs. The Workgroup for HArmonized Taxonomy of NETworks (WHATNET) was formed in 2020 as an Organization for Human Brain Mapping (OHBM)-endorsed best practices committee to provide recommendations on points of consensus, identify open questions, and highlight areas of ongoing debate in the service of moving the field toward standardized reporting of network neuroscience results. The committee conducted a survey to catalog current practices in large-scale brain network nomenclature. A few well-known network names (e.g., default mode network) dominated responses to the survey, and a number of illuminating points of disagreement emerged. We summarize survey results and provide initial considerations and recommendations from the workgroup. This perspective piece includes a selective review of challenges to this enterprise, including (1) network scale, resolution, and hierarchies; (2) interindividual variability of networks; (3) dynamics and nonstationarity of networks; (4) consideration of network affiliations of subcortical structures; and (5) consideration of multimodal information. We close with minimal reporting guidelines for the cognitive and network neuroscience communities to adopt.

Systematic changes have been observed in the functional architecture of the human brain with advancing age. However, functional connectivity (FC) is also a powerful feature to detect unique "connectome fingerprints," allowing identification of individuals among their peers. Although fingerprinting has been robustly observed in samples of young adults, the reliability of this approach has not been demonstrated across the lifespan. We applied the fingerprinting framework to the Cambridge Centre for Ageing and Neuroscience cohort (n = 483 aged 18 to 89 years). We found that individuals are "fingerprintable" (i.e., identifiable) across independent functional MRI scans throughout the lifespan. We observed a U-shape distribution in the strength of "self-identifiability" (within-individual correlation across modalities), and "others-identifiability" (between-individual correlation across modalities), with a decrease from early adulthood into middle age, before improving in older age. FC edges contributing to self-identifiability were not restricted to specific brain networks and were different between individuals across the lifespan sample. Self-identifiability was additionally associated with regional brain volume. These findings indicate that individual participant-level identification is preserved across the lifespan despite the fact that its components are changing nonlinearly.

Although practicing a task generally benefits later performance on that same task, there are individual differences in practice effects. One avenue to model such differences comes from research showing that brain networks extract functional advantages from operating in the vicinity of criticality, a state in which brain network activity is more scale-free. We hypothesized that higher scale-free signal from fMRI data, measured with the Hurst exponent (H), indicates closer proximity to critical states. We tested whether individuals with higher H during repeated task performance would show greater practice effects. In Study 1, participants performed a dual-n-back task (DNB) twice during MRI (n = 56). In Study 2, we used two runs of n-back task (NBK) data from the Human Connectome Project sample (n = 599). In Study 3, participants performed a word completion task (CAST) across six runs (n = 44). In all three studies, multivariate analysis was used to test whether higher H was related to greater practice-related performance improvement. Supporting our hypothesis, we found patterns of higher H that reliably correlated with greater performance improvement across participants in all three studies. However, the predictive brain regions were distinct, suggesting that the specific spatial H↑ patterns are not task-general.

Assessment of functional connectivity (FC) has revealed a great deal of knowledge about the macroscale spatiotemporal organization of the brain network. Recent studies found task-versus-rest network reconfigurations were crucial for cognitive functioning. However, brain network reconfiguration remains unclear among different cognitive states, considering both aggregate and time-resolved FC profiles. The current study utilized static FC (sFC, i.e., long timescale aggregate FC) and sliding window-based dynamic FC (dFC, i.e., short timescale time-varying FC) approaches to investigate the similarity and alterations of edge weights and network topology at different cognitive loads, particularly their relationships with specific cognitive process. Both dFC/sFC networks showed subtle but significant reconfigurations that correlated with task performance. At higher cognitive load, brain network reconfiguration displayed increased functional integration in the sFC-based aggregate network, but faster and larger variability of modular reorganization in the dFC-based time-varying network, suggesting difficult tasks require more integrated and flexible network reconfigurations. Moreover, sFC-based network reconfigurations mainly linked with the sensorimotor and low-order cognitive processes, but dFC-based network reconfigurations mainly linked with the high-order cognitive process. Our findings suggest that reconfiguration profiles of sFC/dFC networks provide specific information about cognitive functioning, which could potentially be used to study brain function and disorders.

Computational models are often used to assess how functional connectivity (FC) patterns emerge from neuronal population dynamics and anatomical brain connections. It remains unclear whether the commonly used group-averaged data can predict individual FC patterns. The Jansen and Rit neural mass model was employed, where masses were coupled using individual structural connectivity (SC). Simulated FC was correlated to individual magnetoencephalography-derived empirical FC. FC was estimated using phase-based (phase lag index (PLI), phase locking value (PLV)), and amplitude-based (amplitude envelope correlation (AEC)) metrics to analyze their goodness of fit for individual predictions. Individual FC predictions were compared against group-averaged FC predictions, and we tested whether SC of a different participant could equally well predict participants' FC patterns. The AEC provided a better match between individually simulated and empirical FC than phase-based metrics. Correlations between simulated and empirical FC were higher using individual SC compared to group-averaged SC. Using SC from other participants resulted in similar correlations between simulated and empirical FC compared to using participants' own SC. This work underlines the added value of FC simulations using individual instead of group-averaged SC for this particular computational model and could aid in a better understanding of mechanisms underlying individual functional network trajectories.