Cited by 245Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsNeural dynamics and brain function

Neurophysiological Investigation of Spontaneous Correlated and Anticorrelated Fluctuations of the BOLD Signal

Open access
Keller, Corey J., Bickel, Stephan, Honey, Christopher J., Groppe, David M., Entz, Laszlo, Craddock, R. Cameron, Lado, Fred A., Kelly, Clare +2 more·2013·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Analyses of intrinsic fMRI BOLD signal fluctuations reliably reveal correlated and anticorrelated functional networks in the brain. Because the BOLD signal is an indirect measure of neuronal activity and anticorrelations can be introduced by preprocessing steps, such as global signal regression, the neurophysiological significance of correlated and anticorrelated BOLD fluctuations is a source of debate. Here, we address this question by examining the correspondence between the spatial organization of correlated BOLD fluctuations and correlated fluctuations in electrophysiological high γ power signals recorded directly from the cortical surface of 5 patients. We demonstrate that both positive and negative BOLD correlations have neurophysiological correlates reflected in fluctuations of spontaneous neuronal activity. Although applying global signal regression to BOLD signals results in some BOLD anticorrelations that are not apparent in the ECoG data, it enhances the neuronal-hemodynamic correspondence overall. Together, these findings provide support for the neurophysiological fidelity of BOLD correlations and anticorrelations.

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.4837-12.2013

Cites

67 of 67 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?

  • The default network has an anticorrelated or antiphase relationship with the dorsal attention network.

    “The DN has an anticorrelated or antiphase relationship with the dorsal attention network (DAN),14,139,140 a brain system consisting of the posterior prefrontal cortex, the inferior precentral sulcus, the superior occipital gyrus, the middle temporal motion complex, and the superior parietal lobule14,51,141 (Fig. 5A).”
  • Such improvements likely reflect the reduction in shared variance amongst regions due to noise and a true global signal.

    “Such improvements, also consistent with other reports (Fox et al., 2009, Keller et al., 2013), likely reflect the reduction in shared variance amongst regions due to noise and a true global signal (Scholvinck et al., 2010) – an important consideration for the current report.”

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: 2

  1. Lauritzen SL 1996 Graphical Models Oxford Oxford University Press
  2. Whittaker J 1990 Graphical Models in Applied Multivariate Statistics Chichester J. Wiley and Sons

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keller, C. J., Bickel, S., Honey, C. J., Groppe, D. M., Entz, L., Craddock, R. C., Lado, F. A., Kelly, C., Milham, M., & Mehta, A. D.
Affiliations
  • Feinstein Institute for Medical Research (US)
  • Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
  • Child Mind Institute (US)
  • New York University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2013-04-10
Volume
33
Issue
15
Pages
6333-6342
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2007386823
Cited by
245
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 15
FWCI
16.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (1f31ns080357-01)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM007288)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (F31 NS080357, F31NS080357-01)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
BOLD signal fluctuations, functional brain networks, global signal regression, high-gamma power, electrocorticography, spontaneous neuronal activity, hemodynamic response
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Electrodes, Implanted, Electroencephalography, Female, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neural Pathways, Neurons, Neurophysiology, ROC Curve, Brain Waves

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