Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/64385
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWilliams, Rebecca Jen
dc.contributor.authorReutens, David Cen
dc.contributor.authorHocking, Juliaen
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-08T02:23:32Z-
dc.date.available2025-01-08T02:23:32Z-
dc.date.issued2018-06-28-
dc.identifier.citationFrontiers in Neuroscience, v.10, p. 1-15en
dc.identifier.issn1662-453Xen
dc.identifier.issn1662-4548en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/64385-
dc.description.abstract<p>Reliance on the hemodynamic response as a surrogate marker of neural activity imposes an intrinsic limit on the spatial specificity of functional MRI. An alternative approach based on diffusion-weighted functional MRI (DfMRI) has been reported as a contrast less reliant on hemodynamic effects, however current evidence suggests that both hemodynamic and unique neural sources contribute to the diffusion signal. Here we compare activation patterns obtained with the standard blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) contrast to DfMRI in order to gain a deeper understanding of how the BOLD proportion contributes to the observable diffusion signal. Both individual and group-level activation patterns obtained with DfMRI and BOLD to a visual field stimulation paradigm were analyzed. At the individual level, the DfMRI contrast showed a strong, positive relationship between the volumes of cortex activated in response to quadrant- and hemifield visual stimulation. This was not observed in the corresponding BOLD experiment. Overall, the DfMRI response indicated less between-subject variability, with random effects analyses demonstrating higher statistical values at the peak voxel for DfMRI. Furthermore, the spatial extent of the activation was more restricted to the primary visual region for DfMRI than BOLD. However, the diffusion signal was sensitive to the hemodynamic response in a manner dependent on experimental manipulation. It was also limited by its low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), demonstrating lower sensitivity than BOLD. Together these findings both support DfMRI as a contrast that bears a closer spatial relationship to the underlying neural activity than BOLD, and raise important caveats regarding its utilization. Models explaining the DfMRI signal change need to consider the dynamic vascular contributions that may vary with neural activity.</p>en
dc.languageenen
dc.publisherFrontiers Research Foundationen
dc.relation.ispartofFrontiers in Neuroscienceen
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.titleInfluence of BOLD contributions to diffusion fMRI activation of the visual cortexen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.doi10.3389/fnins.2016.00279en
dcterms.accessRightsUNE Greenen
local.contributor.firstnameRebecca Jen
local.contributor.firstnameDavid Cen
local.contributor.firstnameJuliaen
local.relation.isfundedbyNHMRCen
local.profile.schoolSchool of Science and Technologyen
local.profile.emailrwilli90@une.edu.auen
local.output.categoryC1en
local.grant.numberNo. 628952en
local.grant.numberNo. 628952en
local.record.placeauen
local.record.institutionUniversity of New Englanden
local.publisher.placeSwitzerlanden
local.identifier.runningnumber279en
local.format.startpage1en
local.format.endpage15en
local.peerreviewedYesen
local.identifier.volume10en
local.access.fulltextYesen
local.contributor.lastnameWilliamsen
local.contributor.lastnameReutensen
local.contributor.lastnameHockingen
dc.identifier.staffune-id:rwilli90en
local.profile.orcid0000-0002-8949-1197en
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.identifier.unepublicationidune:1959.11/64385en
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
local.title.maintitleInfluence of BOLD contributions to diffusion fMRI activation of the visual cortexen
local.output.categorydescriptionC1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journalen
local.relation.grantdescriptionNHMRC/No. 628952en
local.search.authorWilliams, Rebecca Jen
local.search.authorReutens, David Cen
local.search.authorHocking, Juliaen
local.open.fileurlhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/36219c84-d081-4de4-b992-5077dc75ea9den
local.uneassociationNoen
local.atsiresearchNoen
local.sensitive.culturalNoen
local.year.published2018en
local.fileurl.openhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/36219c84-d081-4de4-b992-5077dc75ea9den
local.fileurl.openpublishedhttps://rune.une.edu.au/web/retrieve/36219c84-d081-4de4-b992-5077dc75ea9den
local.subject.for20203209 Neurosciencesen
local.profile.affiliationtypeExternal Affiliationen
local.profile.affiliationtypeExternal Affiliationen
local.profile.affiliationtypeExternal Affiliationen
local.date.moved2025-01-08en
Appears in Collections:Journal Article
School of Science and Technology
Files in This Item:
2 files
File Description SizeFormat 
openpublished/InfluenceWilliams2016JournalArticle.pdfPublished Version2.93 MBAdobe PDF
Download Adobe
View/Open
Show simple item record
Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons