Directional connectivity in mouse fMRI networks
Md Taufiq Nasseef1,2, Adam Liska1,2, Stefano Panzeri1, and Alessandro Gozzi1

1Italian Institute of Technology,Center for Neuroscience and Cognitive Systems @UniTn, Rovereto, Italy, 2Center for Mind/Brain Sciences, University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy

Synopsis

Mouse resting-state fMRI (rsfMRI) has revealed the presence of distributed functional connectivity networks including two sets of regions exhibiting neuro-anatomical features reminiscent of the human salience (SN) and default-mode-network (DMN). Here, we applied Granger Causality to investigate the direction of information flow within mouse rsfMRI networks characterized by mono-directional and reciprocal underlying axonal connectivity. We show that multiple intrinsic rsfMRI networks of the mouse brain exhibit robust patterns of directional connectivity towards prefrontal regions, replicating topological features of human rsfMRI networks, and in agreement with higher integrative role subserved by these areas.

Purpose

Intrinsic functional connectivity mapping via resting-state BOLD fMRI (rsfMRI) has highlighted the presence of spatially-correlated spontaneous oscillations defining reproducible brain network systems underlying known as well as less understood brain functions. However, classic rsfMRI approaches typically rely on correlational connectivity measurements intrinsically insensitive to the direction of information flow among affected regions1. The recent development of computational approaches enabling a description of rsfMRI networks in directional terms has highlighted the possibility of effectively describe how brain region interact and communicate in the resting-state, with encouraging initial results. Multivariate Granger Causality (GC)2 in humans highlighted putative causal interactions between distributed rsfMRI networks, and revealed robust directional insular and middle temporal to prefrontal connectivity as well as a major receiving role from hippocampal formation areas3.

By employing rigorous control of motion and physiological artefacts, we have recently shown the presence of robust and reproducible rsfMRI networks in the mouse brain, including SN and a putative default mode network (DMN)4,5. Here, we applied GC to probe group- and subject level directional functional connectivity among key nodes of distributed mouse rsfMRI networks. In particular, we first validated our GC methodology by demonstrating its ability to reveal directed connectivity in the ventro-hippocampal-prefrontal network, a neural system well studied in rodents and humans6,7 and characterised by mono-directional underlying axonal connectivity8,9. We then used this methodology to examine directional functional connectivity in key nodes of the mouse brain insular-prefrontal (“salience”-like) and DMN, two distributed systems characterized by complex anatomical connectivity patterns8, and that could putatively be related to analogous human networks.

Methods

Experiments were performed on male C57BL/6J (B6) mice (n=41) as previously described4,5. RsfMRI timeseries were acquired under halothane anaesthesia (0.7%). Image acquisition: All experiments were performed by a 7.0 Tesla MRI scanner, using a single-shot EPI sequence with TR/TE 1200/15 ms, flip angle 30°, matrix 100 × 100, field of view 2 × 2 cm2, 24 coronal slices, slice thickness 0.50 mm and a total rsfMRI acquisition time of 6 min. Image preprocessing: images were motion corrected, spatially normalized, smoothed band-pass filtered and regression of motion traces and the mean ventricular signal was applied. Granger causality (GC) analysis: We defined multiple sets of seed ROIs within the mouse Hippocampus-PFC network, SN & DMN that can be related to analogous key subsystems of the human. For each set of network we computed unconditional GC( UGC)2 and conditional GC(CGC)2(one node conditional GC(1C-GC) and 2C-GC for 4 node network probing) along with dominant directional causality10 defined as the difference between causality in each direction. Subject level analysis: we used iMAAFT11 non-parametric surrogates’ construction methods to generate 1000 surrogates for each pair of regions and selected significance as p<0.05, FDR corrected.

Results and discussion

We first fine-tuned GC analysis by applying over different GC measures to find similar directionality patterns following the anatomical monodirectional wiring of the ventro-hippocampal-prefrontal(vHC-PFC) network at both population and subject level (Fig. 1). CGC revealed robust and reproducible directional connectivity patterns along direction of hippocampal axonal projections8,9. Probing of the insular prefrontal system highlighted the presence of dominant antero-posterior functional connectivity patterns reminiscent of directional features recently described for the human salience network12,13(Fig. 2). To understand the effect of limited data size in four node network, we carried out simulation on different sample size of the data using full VAR2 model fitted to all nodes in vHC-Rs-PFC network and found evidence that 1C-GC was the most efficient compared to other GC strategies (Fig. 3). We applied this approach to probe a four key nodes of the mouse DMN and observed the presence of robust directional functional connectivity between temporal associative and prefrontal regions, together with a “sink effect” of retrosplenial cortex with respect of temporal cortical areas, recapitulating analogous human findings 14,15(Fig. 4). All the effects were reproduced with different sets of ROIs and also in data added with pink noise to homogenize signal throughout the brain.

Conclusion

We demonstrate robust directional connectivity patterns in distributed rsfMRI networks of the mouse brain, including converging dominant connectivity between lateral cortical areas and medial prefrontal and cingulate regions, replicating topological features of known human rsfMRI networks, and consistent with a higher integrative function subserved by these areas. These results provide a novel interpretative window on the intrinsic functional architecture of the mouse brain at the macroscale.

Acknowledgements

Supported by the SI-CODE project of the FET FP7 Programme for Research of the European Commission (under FET-Open Grant FP7284553).

References

[1] Bullmore and Sporns. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2009;10:186-198 [2] Barnett and Seth. J Neurosci Meth. 2014;223:50-68 [3] Deshpande et al., NeuroImage. 2011;54:1043-1052 [4] Yang et al., Nat Neurosci. 2014; 17:400-406 [5] Sforazzini et al., NeuroImage 2014; 87:403-415 [6] Zhan et al.; Nat Neurosci 2014; 17:400-406 [7] Schwarz et al., J Neurosci. 2013; 228:243-258 [ 8] Vertes, Synapse 2004, 51:32–58 [9] Hoover et al., Brain Struct Funct. 2007, 212:149–179 [10] Roebroeck et al. Neuroimage 2005; 25:230-242 [11] Schreiber et al.,Phys. D Nonlinear Phenom. 2000, 142, 3–4: 346–382 [12] Sridharan et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105, 2008, 34: 12569-74 [13] Chen et al.,Eur J Neurosci. 2015,41:264-274 [14] Jiao et al. Hum Brain Mapp. 2011;32: 154-161 [15] Di et al., NeuroImage 2013; 86:53-59

Figures

Figure 1: Directional connectivity in the frontal-hippocampal network. A, Seed-correlation maps(T>3, cc=0.001); B, Seed location of PFC and vHC seeds; C, Mean±SEM of U-GC and C-GC for all ROI pairs(***p<0.0001, paired t-test); D, Graphical illustration of dominant directional C-GC; E, Percentage of subject level analysis with C-GC in either direction.

Figure 2: Directional connectivity in two ROI sets of "salience" network: A-E and F-J. A & F, correlation maps (T>3, cc=0.001, N=41); B & G, ROI locations; C & H, illustrates C-GC results paired t-test (*p<0.05, **p<0.001, *** p<0.0001); D & I, are graphical illustration of C-GC analysis; E & J, subject level analysis using C-GC.

Figure 3: Simulations to investigate GC. A, PFC and vHCL, B, PFC and vHCR, C, vHCL and vHCR; [Left panels: location of the ROIs where blue cube represents paired ROIs and green cube represents the confounders, middle panels: mean±SEM of GC difference and right panels: P values obtained by paired ttest

Figure 4: Directional connectivity of mouse “default network”. A, ICA (Z >1); B, Seed-correlation maps of TeA (TeA, red lettering, T>4, cc=0.0001, N=41); C, Location of ROIs; D, Results of 1C-GC analysis (***p<0.0001, paired t-test); E, graphical illustration of the dominant directional 1C-GC analysis; F, Percentage of subject level analysis with 1C-GC in either direction.



Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 24 (2016)
1651