% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@INPROCEEDINGS{Patil:905260,
author = {Patil, Kaustubh and Popovych, Oleksandr and Jain, Shraddha},
title = {{G}ender {D}ifferences in {E}mpirical and {S}imulated
{B}rain {C}onnectomes},
reportid = {FZJ-2022-00543},
year = {2021},
abstract = {Investigating gender differences in brain connectomes has
been an active area of research in neuroscience. Previous
studies have, however, explored only the empirical
connectomes. This projectconsiders simulated brain
connectomes generated by whole-brain dynamical models and
their correlation with the empirical connectomes to
investigate gender differences. The analysis involves
272subjects from the human connectome project (144 females).
For each individual and 11 brain parcellation schemes, we
calculated an empirical structural connectivity (eSC), an
empirical functionalconnectivity (eFC) of the resting-state
fMRI BOLD signals and two simulated functional
connectivity(sFC) matrices based on the ensembles of coupled
phase- (PO) and limit-cycle (LC) oscillators. Thegender
difference was then investigated using the Wilcoxon sum
ranks test of the Pearson’s correlation coefficient
corr(sFC, eFC) between the simulated and the empirical
functional connectomes. Weobserved a significantly higher
correlation for males for 11 parcellations. Since the models
utilizethe empirical information, we regressed out the brain
size and empirical structure-function relationship corr(eFC,
eSC), to check if the gender difference still persists.
After the regression, thisdifference remains significant for
10 atlases for PO model and for 8 atlases for LC model.
Interestingly, the gender difference in corr(eFC, eSC)
showed an opposite trend - the females showed a
betterstructure-function correspondence than males. This is
in contrast with the modeling results, wherea better fit
between sFC and eFC is observed for males. A potential
reason for this discrepancy couldbe the difference in
complexity of the empirical data between genders, which in
turn may influencethe quality of the model fitting. The
project currently aims to examine this in more detail.},
month = {Oct},
date = {2021-10-05},
organization = {INM $\&$ IBI Retreat 2021,
Forschungszentrum Jülich, Virtual
Conference (Germany), 5 Oct 2021 - 6
Oct 2021},
subtyp = {After Call},
cin = {INM-7},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406},
pnm = {5232 - Computational Principles (POF4-523) / 5231 -
Neuroscientific Foundations (POF4-523) / 5254 -
Neuroscientific Data Analytics and AI (POF4-525) / HBP SGA2
- Human Brain Project Specific Grant Agreement 2 (785907) /
HBP SGA3 - Human Brain Project Specific Grant Agreement 3
(945539) / VirtualBrainCloud - Personalized Recommendations
for Neurodegenerative Disease (826421)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5232 / G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5231 /
G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5254 / G:(EU-Grant)785907 /
G:(EU-Grant)945539 / G:(EU-Grant)826421},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)24},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/905260},
}