Cited by 171Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsNeural dynamics and brain function

Network structure shapes spontaneous functional connectivity dynamics

Open access
Shen, Kelly, Hutchison, R. Matthew, Bezgin, Gleb, Everling, Stefan, McIntosh, Anthony R.·2015·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

The structural organization of the brain constrains the range of interactions between different regions and shapes ongoing information processing. Therefore, it is expected that large-scale dynamic functional connectivity (FC) patterns, a surrogate measure of coordination between brain regions, will be closely tied to the fiber pathways that form the underlying structural network. Here, we empirically examined the influence of network structure on FC dynamics by comparing resting-state FC (rsFC) obtained using BOLD-fMRI in macaques (Macaca fascicularis) to structural connectivity derived from macaque axonal tract tracing studies. Consistent with predictions from simulation studies, the correspondence between rsFC and structural connectivity increased as the sample duration increased. Regions with reciprocal structural connections showed the most stable rsFC across time. The data suggest that the transient nature of FC is in part dependent on direct underlying structural connections, but also that dynamic coordination can occur via polysynaptic pathways. Temporal stability was found to be dependent on structural topology, with functional connections within the rich-club core exhibiting the greatest stability over time. We discuss these findings in light of highly variable functional hubs. The results further elucidate how large-scale dynamic functional coordination exists within a fixed structural architecture.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.4903-14.2015

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shen, K., Hutchison, R. M., Bezgin, G., Everling, S., & McIntosh, A. R.
Affiliations
  • Rotman Research Institute (CA)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Western University (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2015-04-08
Volume
35
Issue
14
Pages
5579-5588
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2052061512
Cited by
171
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 16
FWCI
17.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Scholarship@Western (Western University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
resting-state functional connectivity, dynamic functional connectivity, structural connectivity, brain network topology, macaque, functional hubs, polysynaptic pathways, reciprocal connections
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Macaca fascicularis, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Models, Neurological, Neural Pathways, Oxygen, Nonlinear Dynamics

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