Cited by 12Advanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies

Generation of a whole-brain hemodynamic response function and sex-specific differences in cerebral processing of mechano-sensation in mice detected by BOLD fMRI

Open access
Chen, Hui-Fen, Lambers, Henriette, Nagelmann, Nina, Sandbrink, Martin, Segelcke, Daniel, Pogatzki-Zahn, Esther, Faber, Cornelius, Pradier, Bruno·2023·Frontiers in Neuroscience

Abstract

BOLD fMRI has become a prevalent method to study cerebral sensory processing in rodent disease models, including pain and mechanical hypersensitivity. fMRI data analysis is frequently combined with a general-linear-model (GLM) -based analysis, which uses the convolution of a hemodynamic response function (HRF) with the stimulus paradigm. However, several studies indicated that the HRF differs across species, sexes, brain structures, and experimental factors, including stimulation modalities or anesthesia, and hence might strongly affect the outcome of BOLD analyzes. While considerable work has been done in humans and rats to understand the HRF, much less is known in mice. As a prerequisite to investigate mechano-sensory processing and BOLD fMRI data in male and female mice, we (1) designed a rotating stimulator that allows application of two different mechanical modalities, including innocuous von Frey and noxious pinprick stimuli and (2) determined and statistically compared HRFs across 30 brain structures and experimental conditions, including sex and, stimulus modalities. We found that mechanical stimulation lead to brain-wide BOLD signal changes thereby allowing extraction of HRFs from multiple brain structures. However, we did not find differences in HRFs across all brain structures and experimental conditions. Hence, we computed a whole-brain mouse HRF, which is based on 88 functional scans from 30 mice. A comparison of this mouse-specific HRF with our previously reported rat-derived HRF showed significantly slower kinetics in mice. Finally, we detected pronounced differences in cerebral BOLD activation between male and female mice with mechanical stimulation, thereby exposing divergent processing of noxious and innocuous stimuli in both sexes.

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 · 10.3389/fnins.2023.1187328

Cites

95 of 95 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?

  • Convolving theta-band power with a double-gamma HRF noticeably strengthened its correlation with idYFP and shifted the cross-correlation peak to zero lag.

    “Convolving theta-band power with this HRF noticeably strengthened its correlation with idYFP and shifted the cross-correlation peak to zero lag.”

    From Energy paradox in REM sleep: balancing supply and consumption in brain metabolism (2026) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Materials and methods sections describe convolving a stimulation paradigm with a double-gamma HRF to model mouse BOLD signals. The Results discuss BOLD activation, but the passages found for theta-band power, idYFP, and cross-correlation do not address whether their correlation strengthened or its peak shifted to zero lag. No passage in our copy verifies the attributed result. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    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. Franklin K. Paxinos G. (2008). The mouse brain in stereotaxic coordinates, compact. 3rd Edn Academic Press Available at: https://www.elsevier.com/books/the-mouse-brain-in-stereotaxic-coordinates-compact/franklin/978-0-12-374244-5.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, H.-F., Lambers, H., Nagelmann, N., Sandbrink, M., Segelcke, D., Pogatzki-Zahn, E., Faber, C., & Pradier, B.
Affiliations
University of Münster (DE)
Corresponding author
Pradier, Bruno
Venue
Frontiers in Neuroscience
Published
2023-08-28
Volume
17
Pages
1187328-1187328
ISSN
1662-453X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4386223516
Cited by
12
References
95
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2
FWCI
1.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • URN:NBN Resolver for Germany & Switzerland (German National Library) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Münster (cc-by)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
Keywords
hemodynamic response function, sex differences, mechanosensing, BOLD fMRI, mice, rodent pain models

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