| Literature DB >> 35603133 |
Jie Xiang1, Chanjuan Fan1, Jing Wei1, Ying Li1, Bin Wang1, Yan Niu1, Lan Yang1, Jiaqi Lv1, Xiaohong Cui1.
Abstract
Although many resting state and task state characteristics have been studied, it is still unclear how the brain network switches from the resting state during tasks. The current theory shows that the brain is a complex dynamic system and synchrony is defined to measure brain activity. The study compared the changes of synchrony between the resting state and different task states in healthy young participants (N = 954). It also examined the ability to switch from the resting state to the task-general architecture of synchrony. We found that the synchrony increased significantly during the tasks. And the results showed that the brain has a task-general architecture of synchrony during different tasks. The main feature of task-based reasoning is that the increase in synchrony of high-order cognitive networks is significant, while the increase in synchrony of sensorimotor networks is relatively low. In addition, the high synchrony of high-order cognitive networks in the resting state can promote task switching effectively and the pre-configured participants have better cognitive performance, which shows that spontaneous brain activity and cognitive ability are closely related. These results revealed changes in the brain network configuration for switching between the resting state and task state, highlighting the consistent changes in the brain network between different tasks. Also, there was an important relationship between the switching ability and the cognitive performance.Entities:
Keywords: cognitive performance; high-order cognitive networks; synchrony; the task-general architecture; update efficiency
Year: 2022 PMID: 35603133 PMCID: PMC9120823 DOI: 10.3389/fncom.2022.883660
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Comput Neurosci ISSN: 1662-5188 Impact factor: 2.380
Figure 1Overview of experimental design. (A) Data pre-processing and calculate synchrony. (B) Relationship between resting state and task states.
Basic information of the participants.
|
|
|
|---|---|
| Gender (Male: Female) | 503: 451 |
| Age (Years) | 22–35 |
| Language accuracy | 80.03 ± 6.96 |
| Emotion accuracy | 97.50 ± 3.65 |
| Relational accuracy | 76.26 ± 12.49 |
| TWmemory accuracy | 87.79 ± 8,79 |
| Fluid intelligence | 107.31 ± 16.60 |
| Crystallized intelligence | 111.10 ± 16.61 |
Seven human connectome project fMRI tasks.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Language | 3:57 | Participants were asked to answer questions, including story conditions and math conditions. |
| Emotion | 2:16 | Participants were asked to choose the same face at the bottom of the screen and the top of the screen. |
| Relational | 2:56 | Participants determine whether the shape, texture, and size of the two objects are the same. |
| Social | 3:27 | Participants watch video clips of objects interacting in an agentive way or random way. |
| Working memory | 5:01 | Participants respond when the picture shown on the screen is the same as the two trials back (2-back) or the same as the one shown at the start of the block (0-back). |
| Gambling | 3:12 | Participants guess whether the numbers on the card are greater than 5, to determine whether they will win or lose |
| Motor | 3:34 | Participants move their fingers, toes, or tongue according to the prompts |
Figure 2The difference of global synchrony during resting state and different task states. Bars display the mean value, 95% CI, and one SD with individual subjects indicated (***, p < 0.001). Tasks are arranged in ascending order of mean synchrony.
Figure 3The difference of synchrony between RSNs in resting state and different task states. The graph used the t-value to show the largest connected subgraph of the difference. The darker the color, the greater the difference.
Figure 4The PCA quantifies the degree of sharing based on the functional configuration of seven tasks. (A) The histogram of each component accounts for the variance between the seven tasks, and the broken line indicates the cumulative proportion of each component. (B) The loading of seven tasks. The error bar indicates the standard deviation. (C) Correlation between the synchrony of the seven tasks.
Figure 5PCA reveals a task-general network architecture of synchrony. (A) Low synchrony subnet. (B) High synchrony subnet.
Figure 6The correlation between the synchrony of the RSNs and the update efficiency. (A) The correlation coefficient (slope) between synchrony of RSNs and update efficiency. (B) There is a significant correlation coefficient between synchrony of RSNs and update efficiency. (C) There are RSNs with a positive correlation between update efficiency and synchrony. The darker the color, the higher the correlation. The size of the node represents the sum of the correlations at the RSN. (D) There are RSNs with a negative correlation between update efficiency and synchrony.
Figure 7The correlation between update efficiency and cognitive performance. (A) The correlation between update efficiency and behavioral accuracy. (B) The correlation between update efficiency and cognitive intelligence. There is a positive correlation between update efficiency and behavioral accuracy.