Cited by 130Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications

Bridging the gap between the human and macaque connectome: a quantitative comparison of global interspecies structure–function relationships and network topology

Open access
Miranda-Dominguez, Oscar, Mills, Brian D., Grayson, David, Woodall, Andrew, Grant, Kathleen A., Kroenke, Christopher D., Fair, Damien A.·2014·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Resting state functional connectivity MRI (rs-fcMRI) may provide a powerful and noninvasive “bridge” for comparing brain function between patients and experimental animal models; however, the relationship between human and macaque rs-fcMRI remains poorly understood. Here, using a novel surface deformation process for species comparisons in the same anatomical space (Van Essen, 2004, 2005), we found high correspondence, but also unique hub topology, between human and macaque functional connectomes. The global functional connectivity match between species was moderate to strong (r= 0.41) and increased when considering the top 15% strongest connections (r= 0.54). Analysis of the match between functional connectivity and the underlying anatomical connectivity, derived from a previous retrograde tracer study done in macaques (Markov et al., 2012), showed impressive structure–function correspondence in both the macaque and human. When examining the strongest structural connections, we found a 70–80% match between structural and functional connectivity matrices in both species. Finally, we compare species on two widely used metrics for studying hub topology: degree and betweenness centrality. The data showed topological agreement across the species, with nodes of the posterior cingulate showing high degree and betweenness centrality. In contrast, nodes in medial frontal and parietal cortices were identified as having high degree and betweenness in the human as opposed to the macaque. Our results provide: (1) a thorough examination and validation for a surface-based interspecies deformation process, (2) a strong theoretical foundation for making interspecies comparisons of rs-fcMRI, and (3) a unique look at topological distinctions between the species.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.4229-13.2014

Cites

68 of 68 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?

  • Improved correspondence of functional connectivity to secondary measures occurs after the use of global regression.

    “Other work in animal models highlights the improved correspondence of functional connectivity to secondary measures (e.g. viral tracings of axonal tracts) after the use of global regression (Miranda-Dominguez et al., 2014).”

    From Characterizing heterogeneity in children with and without ADHD based on reward system connectivity (2015) · cites this paper as Miranda-Dominguez et al., 2014

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Miranda-Dominguez, O., Mills, B. D., Grayson, D., Woodall, A., Grant, K. A., Kroenke, C. D., & Fair, D. A.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • Oregon National Primate Research Center (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2014-04-16
Volume
34
Issue
16
Pages
5552-5563
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2066302516
Cited by
130
References
68
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 11
FWCI
10.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • James S. McDonnell Foundation (R01 MH096773, K99/R00 MH091238)
  • National Institutes of Health (AA109431, K99-R00, K99/R00 MH091238, MH091238, P51OD011092)
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (U01AA013510)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (K99/R00 MH091238, K99MH091238, R00MH091238, R01MH096773)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Keywords
resting-state functional connectivity, human-macaque comparison, surface deformation, structural connectivity, posterior cingulate cortex, betweenness centrality, degree centrality
MeSH terms
Adult, Animals, Brain, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Macaca mulatta, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neural Pathways, Oxygen, Regression Analysis, ROC Curve, Species Specificity, Young Adult, Connectome

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