4.7 Article

Functional connectivity hubs in the human brain

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 57, 期 3, 页码 908-917

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.05.024

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism [2RO1AA09481]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Brain networks appear to have few and well localized regions with high functional connectivity density (hubs) for fast integration of neural processing, and their dysfunction could contribute to neuropsychiatric diseases. However the variability in the distribution of these brain hubs is unknown due in part to the overwhelming computational demands associated to their localization. Recently we developed a fast algorithm to map the local functional connectivity density (IFCD). Here we extend our method to map the global density (gFDC) taking advantage of parallel computing. We mapped the gFCD in the brain of 1031 subjects from the 1000 Functional Connectomes project and show that the strongest hubs are located in regions of the default mode network (DMN) and in sensory cortices, whereas subcortical regions exhibited the weakest hubs. The strongest hubs were consistently located in ventral precuneus/cingulate gyrus (previously identified by other analytical methods including IFCD) and in primary visual cortex (BA 17/18), which highlights their centrality to resting connectivity networks. In contrast and after rescaling, hubs in prefrontal regions had lower gFCD than IFCD, which suggests that their local functional connectivity (as opposed to long-range connectivity) prevails in the resting state. The power scaling of the probability distribution of gFCD hubs (as for IFCD) was consistent across research centers further corroborating the scale-free topology of brain networks. Within and between-subject variability for gFCD were twice than that for IFCD (20% vs. 12% and 84% vs. 34%, respectively) suggesting that gFCD is more sensitive to individual differences in functional connectivity. Published by Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据