Cited by 1,169Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsComplex Network Analysis Techniques

Whole-brain anatomical networks: does the choice of nodes matter?

Zalesky, Andrew, Fornito, Alex, Harding, Ian H., Cocchi, Luca, Yücel, Murat, Pantelis, Christos, Bullmore, Edward T.·2010·NeuroImage

Abstract

Whole-brain anatomical connectivity in living humans can be modeled as a network with diffusion-MRI and tractography. Network nodes are associated with distinct grey-matter regions, while white-matter fiber bundles serve as interconnecting network links. However, the lack of a gold standard for regional parcellation in brain MRI makes the definition of nodes arbitrary, meaning that network nodes are defined using templates employing either random or anatomical parcellation criteria. Consequently, the number of nodes included in networks studied by different authors has varied considerably, from less than 100 up to more than 10(4). Here, we systematically and quantitatively assess the behavior, structure and topological attributes of whole-brain anatomical networks over a wide range of nodal scales, a variety of grey-matter parcellations as well as different diffusion-MRI acquisition protocols. We show that simple binary decisions about network organization, such as whether small-worldness or scale-freeness is evident, are unaffected by spatial scale, and that the estimates of various organizational parameters (e.g. small-worldness, clustering, path length, and efficiency) are consistent across different parcellation scales at the same resolution (i.e. the same number of nodes). However, these parameters vary considerably as a function of spatial scale; for example small-worldness exhibited a difference of 95% between the widely-used automated anatomical labeling (AAL) template (approximately 100 nodes) and a 4000-node random parcellation (sigma(AAL)=1.9 vs. sigma(4000)=53.6+/-2.2). These findings indicate that any comparison of network parameters across studies must be made with reference to the spatial scale of the nodal parcellation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.027

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Global topological metrics for structural and functional networks show stability across different parcellation schema of similar density, but vary considerably as a function of network size.

    “Global topological metrics for structural and functional networks show stability across different parcellation schema of similar density, but vary considerably as a function of network size (de Reus and van den Heuvel, 2013; Fornito et al., 2010; Zalesky et al., 2010).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zalesky, A., Fornito, A., Harding, I. H., Cocchi, L., Yücel, M., Pantelis, C., & Bullmore, E. T.
Affiliations
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Zalesky, Andrew
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-04
Volume
50
Issue
3
Pages
970-983
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2136395604
Cited by
1,169
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 53 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 99 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 94 · 2018: 90 · 2017: 90 · 2016: 106 · 2015: 102 · 2014: 76 · 2013: 96 · 2012: 58
FWCI
20.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Australian Research Council (DP0986320)
  • National Health & Medical Research Council (454797)
  • Swiss National Science Foundation (PBLAB3, -, 119622, PASMP3-129357/1)
  • NHMRC Clinical Career Development Award (509345)
  • NHMRC Senior Principal Research Fellowship (628386)
  • NHMRC (566529)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
Keywords
brain parcellation, small-worldness, scale-free networks, network topology, diffusion MRI, tractography, automated anatomical labeling, white matter fiber bundles, network efficiency, clustering coefficient, path length
MeSH terms
Adult, Algorithms, Brain, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Male, Neural Pathways, Least-Squares Analysis, Nerve Fibers, Unmyelinated, Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Young Adult, Diffusion Tensor Imaging

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