| Literature DB >> 21966364 |
Pew-Thian Yap1, Yong Fan, Yasheng Chen, John H Gilmore, Weili Lin, Dinggang Shen.
Abstract
The human brain is organized into a collection of interacting networks with specialized functions to support various cognitive functions. Recent research has reached a consensus that the brain manifests small-world topology, which implicates both global and local efficiency at minimal wiring costs, and also modular organization, which indicates functional segregation and specialization. However, the important questions of how and when the small-world topology and modular organization come into existence remain largely unanswered. Taking a graph theoretic approach, we attempt to shed light on this matter by an in vivo study, using diffusion tensor imaging based fiber tractography, on 39 healthy pediatric subjects with longitudinal data collected at average ages of 2 weeks, 1 year, and 2 years. Our results indicate that the small-world architecture exists at birth with efficiency that increases in later stages of development. In addition, we found that the networks are broad scale in nature, signifying the existence of pivotal connection hubs and resilience of the brain network to random and targeted attacks. We also observed, with development, that the brain network seems to evolve progressively from a local, predominantly proximity based, connectivity pattern to a more distributed, predominantly functional based, connectivity pattern. These observations suggest that the brain in the early years of life has relatively efficient systems that may solve similar information processing problems, but in divergent ways.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21966364 PMCID: PMC3179462 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024678
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Obtaining the Connectivity Matrix.
A schematic digram illustrating the major processes involved in generating the final connectivity maps. Streamline fiber tractography was performed on each diffusion tensor image and a connectivity matrix was computed based on the AAL [23] ROIs. The fiber count matrices were constructed by enumerating the number of fibers connecting each region pair. The connectivity matrix, indicating consistent connections, was generated by thresholding the fiber count statistics.
Regions of Interest Based on the Automated Anatomical Labeling (AAL) Template.
| Region | Abbrev | Region | Abbrev |
| Left Precentral Gyrus | PreCG-L | Right Precentral Gyrus | PreCG- R |
| Left Superior Frontal Gyrus (dorsal) | SFGdor -L | Right Superior Frontal Gyrus (dorsal) | SFGdor -R |
| Left Orbitofrontal Cortex (superior) | ORBsupb-L | Right Orbitofrontal Cortex (superior) | ORBsupb-R |
| Left Middle Frontal Gyrus | MFG-L | Right Middle Frontal Gyrus | MFG-R |
| Left Orbitofrontal Cortex (middle) | ORBmid-L | Right Orbitofrontal Cortex (middle) | ORBmid-R |
| Left Inferior Frontal Gyrus (opercular) | IFGoperc-L | Right Inferior Frontal Gyrus (opercular) | IFGoperc-R |
| Left Inferior Frontal Gyrus (triangular) | IFGtriang-L | Right Inferior Frontal Gyrus (triangular) | IFGtriang-R |
| Left Orbitofrontal Cortex (inferior) | ORBinf-L | Right Orbitofrontal Cortex (inferior) | ORBinf-R |
| Left Rolandic Operculum | ROL-L | Right Rolandic Operculum | ROL-R |
| Left Supplementary Motor Area | SMA-L | Right Supplementary Motor Area | SMA-R |
| Left Olfactory | OLF-L | Right Olfactory | OLF-R |
| Left Superior Frontal Gyrus (medial) | SFGmed-L | Right Superior Frontal Gyrus (medial) | SFGmed-R |
| Left Orbitofrontal Cortex (medial) | ORBmed-L | Right Orbitofrontal Cortex (medial) | ORBmed-R |
| Left Rectus Gyrus | REC-L | Right Rectus Gyrus | REC-R |
| Left Insula | INS-L | Right Insula | INS-R |
| Left Anterior Cingulate Gyrus | ACG-L | Right Anterior Cingulate Gyrus | ACG-R |
| Left Middle Cingulate Gyrus | MCG-L | Right Middle Cingulate Gyrus | MCG-R |
| Left Posterior Cingulate Gyrus | PCG-L | Right Posterior Cingulate Gyrus | PCG-R |
| Left ParaHippocampal Gyrus | PHG-L | Right ParaHippocampal Gyrus | PHG-R |
| Left Calcarine Cortex | CAL-L | Right Calcarine Cortex | CAL-R |
| Left Cuneus | CUN-L | Right Cuneus | CUN-R |
| Left Lingual Gyrus | LING-L | Right Lingual Gyrus | LING-R |
| Left Superior Occipital Gyrus | SOG-L | Right Superior Occipital Gyrus | SOG-R |
| Left Middle Occipital Gyrus | MOG-L | Right Middle Occipital Gyrus | MOG-R |
| Left Inferior Occipital Gyrus | IOG-L | Right Inferior Occipital Gyrus | IOG-R |
| Left Fusiform Gyrus | FFG-L | Right Fusiform Gyrus | FFG-R |
| Left Postcentral Gyrus | PoCG-L | Right Postcentral Gyrus | PoCG-R |
| Left Superior Parietal Gyrus | SPG-L | Right Superior Parietal Gyrus | SPG-R |
| Left Inferior Parietal Lobule | IPL-L | Right Inferior Parietal Lobule | IPL-R |
| Left Supramarginal Gyrus | SMG-L | Right SupraMarginal Gyrus | SMG-R |
| Left Angular Gyrus | ANG-L | Right Angular Gyrus | ANG-R |
| Left Precuneus | PCUN-L | Right Precuneus | PCUN-R |
| Left Paracentral Lobule | PCL-L | Right Paracentral Lobule | PCL-R |
| Left Heschl Gyrus | HES-L | Right Heschl Gyrus | HES-R |
| Left Superior Temporal Gyrus | STG-L | Right Superior Temporal Gyrus | STG-R |
| Left Temporal Pole (superior) | TPOsup-L | Right Temporal Pole (superior) | TPOsup-R |
| Left Middle Temporal Gyrus lef t | MTG-L | Right Middle Temporal Gyrus | MTG-R |
| Left Temporal Pole (middle) | TPOmid-L | Right Temporal Pole (middle) | TPOmid-R |
| Left Inferior Temporal Gyrus | ITG-L Right | Inferior Temporal Gyrus | ITG-R |
Figure 2Connectograms.
Connectivity matrices characterizing the backbone connections. The network cost is 0.21, which ensures that all nodes were full connected (see Fig. 3).
Figure 3Largest Connected Component.
The number of nodes of the largest connected component in all networks stabilize and reach the maximum possible value (78) at the network cost of 0.21, a value which we used for our analysis, unless otherwise stated.
Figure 4Network Efficiency.
Local and global efficiency of pediatric brain networks of (a) 2-weeks-olds, (b) 1-year-olds and (c) 2-year-olds. All networks exhibit small-world nature, which is characterized by local efficiency greater than comparable random networks, and global efficiency greater than regular lattices [5], [6]. There is a general trend of efficiency increase with age. The neonatal brain network shows significantly lower efficiency compared to the other two age groups.
Figure 5Inter-Region Connection Fiber Length Distribution.
Cumulative distribution plots of the inter-region connection fiber lengths indicate that there is a progressive maturation of long fibers with growth. The dashed horizontal line marks the 0.90 frequency point and indicates that only a small fraction of the fibers are long fibers.
Average Lengths of Connection Fibers (mm).
| Age Group | 2-week-olds | 1-year-olds | 2-year-olds |
| Fiber Length | 40.22 | 66.16 | 62.45 |
|
| - | <0.001 | <0.001 |
|
| <0.001 | - | 0.993 |
|
| <0.001 | 0.993 | - |
Figure 6Node Degree Distributions.
Single-scale, scale-free and broad-scale [39] are characterized by Gaussian/exponential decay, power law decay, and truncated power law decay, respectively. The node degree distributions give good indication that the pediatric brain networks are broad-scale in nature. In the double logarithmic plots, the degree distribution decays linearly before a sharp cutoff. The gradient magnitudes of the fitted lines are 3.921, 2.784 and 2.764 for (a), (b) and (c), respectively.
Figure 7Nonrandom Modularity.
Comparing the modularities [15], [16] of the brain networks with comparable random networks indicates non-random network modularity.
Figure 8Network Communities.
The spring-embedding visualization of networks is implemented with Kamada-Kawai layout algorithm using the Pajek [57] software package (pajek.imfm.si/doku.php). The nodes and intra-modular connections are colored-coded by the communities detected by the algorithm described in [16], while inter-modular connections are colored-coded with light-gray. The sizes of the vertices are weighted by the (logarithmically scaled) node betweenness [29]. Descriptions of the abbreviated region labels can be found in Table 1. See Table 3 for the constituent regions in each community.
Constituent Regions in Each Community.
| Age Group | Community | Regions |
| 2-wk-olds | 1 | PreCG-L ORBsupb-L MFG-L ORBmid-L IFGoperc-L IFGtriang-L ORBinf-L ROL-L OLF-L ORBmed-L REC-L INS-L PHG-L CAL-L LING-L SOG-L MOG-L IOG-L FFG-L PoCG-L SPG-L IPL-L SMG-L ANG-L HES-L STG-L TPOsup-L MTG-L TPOmid-L ITG-L |
| 2 | SFGdor-L SFGdor-R ORBsupb-R ORBmid-R SMA-L SMA-R OLF-R SFGmed-L SFGmed-R ORBmed-R REC-R ACG-L ACG-R MCG-L MCG-R PCUN-L PCL-L PCL-R | |
| 3 | PreCG-R MFG-R IFGoperc-R IFGtriang-R ORBinf-R ROL-R INS-R PCG-L PCG-R PHG-R CAL-R CUN-L CUN-R LING-R SOG-R MOG-R IOG-R FFG-R PoCG-R SPG-R IPL-R SMG-R ANG-R PCUN-R HES-R STG-R TPOsup-R MTG-R TPOmid-R ITG-R | |
| 1-yr-olds | 1 | PreCG-R SFGdor-R ORBsupb-R MFG-R ORBmid-R IFGoperc-R SMA-L SMA-R OLF-R SFGmed-L SFGmed-R ORBmed-L ORBmed-R REC-R ACG-L ACG-R MCG-L MCG-R PCL-L PCL-R |
| 2 | PreCG-L SFGdor-L ORBsupb-L MFG-L ORBmid-L IFGoperc-L IFGtriang-L ORBinf-L ROL-L OLF-L REC-L INS-L PHG-L FFG-L PoCG-L IPL-L SMG-L ANG-L HES-L STG-L TPOsup-L MTG-L TPOmid-L ITG-L | |
| 3 | IFGtriang-R ORBinf-R ROL-R INS-R PCG-L PCG-R PHG-R CAL-L CAL-R CUN-L CUN-R LING-L LING-R SOG-L SOG-R MOG-L MOG-R IOG-L IOG-R FFG-R PoCG-R SPG-L SPG-R IPL-R SMG-R ANG-R PCUN-L PCUN-R HES-R STG-R TPOsup-R MTG-R TPOmid-R ITG-R | |
| 2-yr-olds | 1 | PreCG-L SFGdor-L ORBsupb-L MFG-L ORBmid-L IFGoperc-L IFGtriang-L ORBinf-L ROL-L OLF-L REC-L INS-L PHG-L LING-L MOG-L IOG-L FFG-L PoCG-L IPL-L SMG-L ANG-L HES-L STG-L TPOsup-L MTG-L TPOmid-L ITG-L |
| 2 | PreCG-R SFGdor-R ORBsupb-R MFG-R ORBmid-R IFGoperc-R IFGtriang-R ORBinf-R ROL-R INS-R PCG-R PHG-R CAL-R CUN-R LING-R SOG-R MOG-R IOG-R FFG-R PoCG-R SPG-R IPL-R SMG-R ANG-R PCUN-R HES-R STG-R TPOsup-R MTG-R TPOmid-R ITG-R | |
| 3 | SMA-L SMA-R OLF-R SFGmed-L SFGmed-R ORBmed-L ORBmed-R REC-R ACG-L ACG-R MCG-L MCG-R PCL-L PCL-R | |
| 4 | PCG-L CAL-L CUN-L SOG-L SPG-L PCUN-L |
Figure 9Betweenness Centrality, Intra-Modular Degree, and Participation Coefficient.
The values are sorted based those of the 2-year-olds. The role of each node, as defined in [26], is specified above the respective bar: (A) non-hub ultra-peripheral node; (B) non-hub peripheral node; (C) non-hub connector nodes; and (D) non-hub kinless nodes; (E) provincial hubs; (F) connector hubs; and (G) kinless hubs. No node was found to satisfy the conditions required by (F) and (G).
Figure 10Betweenness Centrality and Vulnerability.
Removal of a node with high betweenness generally results in a significant disruption of information flow in the brain network as indicated by a higher vulnerability value. The dashed lines indicate 95% confidence interval. The betweenness centrality value is normalized by division by the total number of possible connections .
Figure 11Inter-Hemispheric Correlation of Node Betweenness.
Each circle gives the left and right betweenness value for each node. Each age group shows a rightward assymetry - indicated by the slope values 0.2843, 0.6202, and 0.4738, respectively (1 indicates perfect symmetry). The dashed lines indicate 95% confidence interval. The betweenness centrality value is normalized by division by .
Network Efficiency of the Male and Female Brains.
| Global Efficiency | Local Efficiency | |||||
| 2-week-olds | 1-year-olds | 2-year-olds | 2-week-olds | 1-year-olds | 2-year-olds | |
| Male | 0.5550 | 0.5626 | 0.5596 | 0.7574 | 0.7630 | 0.7828 |
| Female | 0.5673 | 0.5673 | 0.5673 | 0.7563 | 0.7563 | 0.7563 |
|
| 0.277 | 0.281 | 0.008 | 0.949 | 0.621 | 0.002 |