Mapping Connectional Differences between Humans and Macaques in the Nucleus Accumbens Shell-Core Architecture
Xia, X.; Fan, L.; Cheng, C.; Cheng, L.; Cao, L.; He, B.; Chen, J.; Li, H.; Jiang, T.
Show abstract
Two nucleus accumbens subregions, the shell and core, differ in the patterns whereby they integrate signals from prefrontal and limbic areas of the brain. In this study, we investigated whether the disproportionate volumetric differences of these brain areas, particularly the prefrontal cortex, between humans and macaques are accompanied by unique modifications of their macroscopic integrative connections with the shell and core. More specifically, we characterized the tractographic connectivity profiles of the human and macaque shell-core architecture and compared them between the two species. To make the cross-species comparisons more viable, we used the same whole-brain voxel-wise tractography-defined shell-like and core-like divisions in the two species as seeds and delineated pairs of interspecies connectionally comparable (ICC) target regions based on the similarity of the resting-state functional connectivity profiles for the two species, and finally used these seeds and ICC targets to establish a fingerprint-based common space for cross-species comparisons. Our results revealed that dissimilar structural connectivity profiles were found in the prefrontal but not the subcortical target group. We further localized this difference to specific targets to infer possible functional modifications between the two species.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- The Human Brain Connectome Weighted by the Myelin Content and Total Intra-Axonal Cross-Sectional Area of White Matter Tracts 96%
- The R1-weighted connectome: complementing brain networks with a myelin-sensitive measure 95%
- Quantifying the influence of biophysical factors in shaping brain communication through remnant functional networks 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.