Cited by 113Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomicsAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications

Imaging transcriptomics of brain disorders

Open access
Arnatkeviciute, Aurina, Fulcher, Ben D., Bellgrove, Mark A., Fornito, Alex·2022·Biological Psychiatry Global Open Science

Abstract

Noninvasive neuroimaging is a powerful tool for quantifying diverse aspects of brain structure and function in vivo, and it has been used extensively to map the neural changes associated with various brain disorders. However, most neuroimaging techniques offer only indirect measures of underlying pathological mechanisms. The recent development of anatomically comprehensive gene expression atlases has opened new opportunities for studying the transcriptional correlates of noninvasively measured neural phenotypes, offering a rich framework for evaluating pathophysiological hypotheses and putative mechanisms. Here, we provide an overview of some fundamental methods in imaging transcriptomics and outline their application to understanding brain disorders of neurodevelopment, adulthood, and neurodegeneration. Converging evidence indicates that spatial variations in gene expression are linked to normative changes in brain structure during age-related maturation and neurodegeneration that are in part associated with cell-specific gene expression markers of gene expression. Transcriptional correlates of disorder-related neuroimaging phenotypes are also linked to transcriptionally dysregulated genes identified in ex vivo analyses of patient brains. Modeling studies demonstrate that spatial patterns of gene expression are involved in regional vulnerability to neurodegeneration and the spread of disease across the brain. This growing body of work supports the utility of transcriptional atlases in testing hypotheses about the molecular mechanism driving disease-related changes in macroscopic neuroimaging phenotypes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bpsgos.2021.10.002

Cites

152 of 152 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Interpreting MRI alterations in AD remains challenging because MRI contrasts reflect complex, combined contributions from cellular composition, microstructural organization, and biochemical changes rather than disease-specific processes alone, and provide only indirect measurements of underlying physiological mechanisms.

    “Interpreting MRI alterations in AD remains challenging because MRI contrasts reflect complex, combined contributions from cellular composition, microstructural organization, and biochemical changes rather than disease‐specific processes alone, 26 , 79 , 80 and provide only indirect measurements of underlying physiological mechanisms. 81”

    From Diffusion MRI reveals amyloid plaque–associated cellular signatures through spatial transcriptomic integration (2026) · cites this paper as [81]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [7]Arnatkeviciute A. Fulcher B.D. Bellgrove M.A. Fornito A. Where the genome meets the connectome: Understanding how genes shape human brain connectivity Neuroimage 244 2021 118570 34508898

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Arnatkeviciute, A., Fulcher, B. D., Bellgrove, M. A., & Fornito, A.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • Monash University (AU)
Venue
Biological Psychiatry Global Open Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-10
Volume
2
Issue
4
Pages
319-331
ISSN
2667-1743 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3206800693
Cited by
113
References
152
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 12
FWCI
1.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biological Psychiatry Global Open Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Sylvia and Charles Viertel Charitable Foundation
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1146292, 1197431)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Keywords
imaging transcriptomics, brain disorders, brain development, neurodegeneration, brain maturation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review