Abstract
Structural connectivity (SC), the physical pathways connecting regions in the brain, and functional connectivity (FC), the temporal coactivations, are known to be tightly linked. However, the nature of this relationship is still not understood. In the present study, we examined this relation more closely in six separate human neuroimaging datasets with different acquisition and preprocessing methods. We show that using simple linear associations, the relation between an individual’s SC and FC is not subject specific for five of the datasets. Subject specificity of SC-FC fit is achieved only for one of the six datasets, the multimodal Glasser Human Connectome Project (HCP) parcellated dataset. We show that subject specificity of SC-FC correspondence is limited across datasets due to relatively small variability between subjects in SC compared with the larger variability in FC.
Highlights
It has been shown that there is a relationship between structural connectivity (SC), the physical white matter tracts between regions, and resting-state functional connectivity (FC), the temporal coactivations between regions
There are very few studies that investigate the subject specificity of this Structural connectivity (SC)-FC correspondence (Honey et al, 2009; Meier et al, 2016), and as far as we know there are no studies that assert that individual SC maps best onto its corresponding FC by using linear measures of association
We found that SC-FC correlations were subject specific only for the Human Connectome Project (HCP) Glasser dataset, and not for the other datasets
Summary
It has been shown that there is a relationship between structural connectivity (SC), the physical white matter tracts between regions, and resting-state functional connectivity (FC), the temporal coactivations between regions (Greicius, Supekar, Menon, & Dougherty, 2009; Hermundstad et al, 2013; Honey, Kotter, Breakspear, & Sporns, 2007; Honey et al, 2009; Koch, Norris, & Hund-Georgiadis, 2002; Misic et al, 2016; Ponce-Alvarez et al, 2015; Skudlarski et al, 2008; van den Heuvel, Mandl, Kahn, & Hulshoff Pol, 2009; van den HeuvelSubject specificity and structural and functional connectivityStructural connectivity: The physical pathways connecting regions in the brain; inferred from diffusion MRI and tractography.Functional connectivity: The temporal co-activations between regions in the brain; derived by calculating all pairwise correlations of regional time series of resting-state fMRI activity.Subject specificity of SC-FC: The finding that an SC correlates better with its corresponding FC (within-subject) than random pairing with another subject’s FC (between-subject).& Sporns, 2013) using both simple linear (Honey et al, 2009) as well as more complex metrics (Misic et al, 2016). There are very few studies that investigate the subject specificity of this SC-FC correspondence (Honey et al, 2009; Meier et al, 2016), and as far as we know there are no studies that assert that individual SC maps best onto its corresponding FC by using linear measures of association. One preliminary investigation conducted by Honey et al (2009) examined this question; results were inconclusive due to the limited sample size.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
