脑成像与脑网络

揭示脑的奥秘是人类面临的最大挑战之一。神经元是构成神经系统结构与功能的基本单位。神经元与神经元之间通过突触实现信息交互,并构成神经环路或神经网络。神经环路有局部的,也有跨脑区或长程的,甚至全脑尺度的。神经环路则是脑实现神经信息处理的基本单元。若干神经环路构成脑网络。脑网络研究已经成为脑功能与脑疾病研究领域的热点。     

研究报告: 小动物高分辨扩散磁共振成像数据分析方法

扩散磁共振成像(dMRI)是一种非侵入性的、能提供生物体内水分子扩散运动相关信息的成像技术,可用于检测神经纤维微观结构的变化．dMRI的出现为大脑结构与功能研究提供了全新的检测手段．过去的20年中,dMRI在实验方法和临床应用上均取得了重大进展．然而dMRI应用在基于动物模型的临床前脑成像研究中却并不常见．本文针对dMRI在临床前脑成像研究中的应用,建立了系列针对小动物高分辨dMRI数据的分析方法：a．构建了大鼠高分辨dMRI图像模板;b．实现了适用于小动物研究的基于体素的统计分析(VBA)方法与基于纤维束的空间统计分析(TBSS)方法;c．实现了小动物脑白质纤维束的确定性与概率性跟踪．这些方法的实现不仅能为小动物脑dMRI研究提供统一的图像模板与完善的计算方法,还将大大促进dMRI技术在小动物脑成像研究中的应用．     

大脑神经联接图谱的研究进展

脑科学旨在阐明神经系统结构和功能,揭示大脑工作的神经机制.由于大脑中神经元数量庞大,神经元形态和功能种类多样,神经元之间的结构与功能联接错综复杂,使得研究脑工作原理尤具挑战.因而,在全脑尺度上绘制神经元之间的联接,即神经联接图谱,揭示大脑各脑区、核团、神经元之间的功能和结构联系,是全面理解脑工作原理的基础.近几年,多维度多模态成像、神经环路示踪与功能调控、图像处理等技术的进步,推动了神经联接图谱研究的迅速发展,使人们得以在局部脑区乃至全脑尺度上观察神经元的形态、联接与活动.本文总结近年来宏观、介观、微观脑神经联接图谱相关技术的进步和神经环路结构与功能研究的进展,对脑联接图谱研究领域面临的挑战与发展趋势加以探讨,并提出斑马鱼(Danio rerio)是目前在全脑尺度上阐释脑结构和功能神经联接图谱的理想动物模型.     

脑空间信息学——连接脑科学与类脑人工智能的桥梁

提出脑空间信息学是示踪、测量、分析、处理和呈现跨层次多尺度脑空间信息数据的一门综合与集成的科学.讨论了脑空间信息学的研究内容、技术体系和关键科学问题,分析了其学科定位,展望了其应用前景.以显微光学切片断层成像为核心的全脑网络可视化技术体系的建立,标志着脑空间信息学这一新兴交叉学科日臻成熟.基于具有明确时空尺度和位置信息的神经元类型、神经环路和网络、血管网络等三维精细脑结构与功能大数据,提取跨层次、多尺度的脑连接时空特征,脑空间信息学将帮助科学家更好地破译脑功能与脑疾病,并推动类脑人工智能的发展.     

综述: 光学显微水平全脑成像方法的研究进展

在全脑水平研究哺乳动物复杂的脑神经网络是现代脑科学的重要研究目标之一,但由于缺乏合适的研究方法,已有的研究还局限于高等动物的局部脑回路或低等动物的脑网络．为了实现大范围的高分辨三维成像,近10年来,发展出了一些光学显微成像新方法,已经或有希望应用于哺乳动物全脑的神经元网络成像研究中．本文对上述方法进行了归纳和比较,综述了各种成像技术在空间分辨率、探测范围、数据配准和成像速度等方面的性能表现及面临的挑战．     

脑科学和脑功能MR成像

目的：在对大脑认知功能进行脑功能成像研究之中,随着磁共振成像技术的发展,人们现在可以对脑的认知功能,如视觉、运动、语言和记忆等功能中枢进行成像。本文首先介绍了脑科学的发展历程,并从脑功能MR成像的方法出发,分析了其成像机理,探讨了用脑功能MR成像为手段对脑科学—认知科学进行的方法研究,最后对脑功能MR成像应用于脑科学的研究作了展望。     

推进神经影像数据共享与开放式脑科学

20世纪80年代末,神经科学与信息科学的融合催生了神经信息学,其核心研究内容之一是对复杂的脑结构与脑功能实现信息化,建设脑数据库,对脑信息处理系统进行数学建模.神经信息学发展的30年来,活体脑成像技术飞速发展,人们得以无创地观测和记录人脑——这一复杂信息系统——的高精度时空特性.进入21世纪,堪比上世纪"阿波罗登月计划"和"曼哈顿计划",脑科学计划成为各国竞相角逐的科学前沿.其中,以推动"无创活体人脑成像技术"最为引人关注.近10年来,以磁共振成像为代表的活体脑成像方法,在推进"人类行为的脑科学基础研究"上取得了显著发展与应用,积累了海量的人脑活体成像数据.针对这类大数据的神经信息化科学研究正在迅速发展为21世纪生命科学的前沿,催生了"开放式"的新型科学理念和合作方式,逐步形成了开放式脑科学研究的崭新方向.本文就人脑磁共振神经影像数据共享的历史和现状,以及开放式脑科学的前景进行了综述.     

采用GCaMP活体钙成像解析神经环路调控机制的研究策略及意义

大脑中的神经元通过集体行为建立相互连接,构成多种神经环路进而执行不同的功能。神经环路的研究方向即寻找构成各神经环路的神经元细胞,研究这些神经元是如何产生通讯互动以此构成特定的环路及环路本身在中枢神经系统行使的生命活动。众多研究已经证实,在解析生理或病理条件下神经环路调控机制过程中,通过实时监测神经元内重要生物传感器钙离子的变化可精确反映大脑组织内神经元活动。GCaMP活体钙成像方法有助于从单细胞水平揭示生理或病理状态下不同环路的调控机制。本文系统综述了GCaMP活体钙成像作为一种示踪技术在神经环路研究中的应用及进展,为神经环路和神经药理学的研究提供了参考依据。     

阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停的脑影像研究：来自静息态脑电和功能磁共振的证据

阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(obstructive sleep apnea, OSA)是一种常见的临床睡眠障碍,表现为上呼吸道在睡眠时反复阻塞,并导致睡眠片段化、间歇性低血氧等症状。本文回顾了针对OSA患者的静息态脑成像研究,包括静息态脑电(electroencephalography, EEG)和静息态功能磁共振成像(functional magnetic resonance imaging, fMRI)。在静息态EEG中,OSA主要表现为前额叶和中央区域δ波和θ波增加;而在静息态fMRI研究中,OSA患者在默认网络(default-mode network, DMN)、中央执行网络(central executive network, CEN)和突显网络(salience network, SN)等大尺度脑网络水平上存在改变。综合来自静息态EEG和静息态fMRI的研究,大量证据都共同指出OSA患者前额叶区域的活动异常,并且其异常活动强度与OSA严重程度相关,表明前额叶是OSA患者大脑功能受损的一个关键脑区。最后,本文从治疗效果、多模态数据采集、以及相关共病等方面对OSA未来研究方向进行了展望。     

加强推进重大精神疾病的研究

正脑科学研究是人类认识自然和认识自我的最大挑战之一,此研究热潮正在世界范围内兴起.西方发达国家纷纷推出大型战略性脑科学研究计划,其中2013年美国总统奥巴马宣布启动的"脑计划"(BRAIN Initiative),此计划侧重于研发新型脑研究技术,目的在于探索大脑功能的神经环路结构基础和功能.欧洲联盟"人脑计划"所关注的是利用已知脑连接图谱数据,应用超级计算机来"模拟脑".日本启动的"脑科学与教育"计划,将脑科学研究作为国家教育发展的一项战略任务,进行面向教育理论和实际的应用     

Modulating Brain Oscillations to Drive Brain Function

Do neuronal oscillations play a causal role in brain function? In a study in this issue of PLOS Biology, Helfrich and colleagues address this long-standing question by attempting to drive brain oscillations using transcranial electrical current stimulation. Remarkably, they were able to manipulate visual perception by forcing brain oscillations of the left and right visual hemispheres into synchrony using oscillatory currents over both hemispheres. Under this condition, human observers more often perceived an inherently ambiguous visual stimulus in one of its perceptual instantiations. These findings shed light on the mechanisms underlying neuronal computation. They show that it is the neuronal oscillations that drive the visual experience, not the experience driving the oscillations. And they indicate that synchronized oscillatory activity groups brain areas into functional networks. This points to new ways for controlled experimental and possibly also clinical interventions for the study and modulation of brain oscillations and associated functions.How does the brain work? How does it code, transfer, and store information? How are conscious experiences generated? These, among others, are long-standing questions neuroscientists try to answer. One way to approach this is to study how the brain orchestrates behaviour, for instance, by measuring brain activity and relating it to behaviour. Yet, studying the brain–behaviour relationship raises another series of questions: What type of brain activity should one look at? Do we need to record directly from single neurons? Or can we make inferences also by recording from larger pools of neurons? And importantly, do these measures of brain activity provide mechanistic accounts of how the brain implements function, or are they just inevitable side-products, with limited explanatory power for the neural mechanisms underlying our experiences, thoughts, or actions?Certainly, one would have a good argument for brain activity causally underlying brain function if (i) this brain activity not only relates to sensory experiences or behavioural performance measures (revealing a correlative brain-behaviour relationship), but (ii) interventions into this brain activity would also modulate our experiences or performance (revealing a causal link). Recent developments allow addressing these central points for oscillatory brain activity, which is what Helfrich et al. [1] did in their study published in this issue of PLOS Biology.At the basis of Helfrich et al.''s study are two lines of research, one of which is concerned with the interpretation of a special type of brain activity, namely, brain oscillations. This type of brain activity represents voltage fluctuations of neuronal elements and was initially observed from one scalp electrode by Hans Berger [2]. Today, brain oscillations are typically recorded from multiple sensors distributed over the scalp or brain, for instance using electro- or magneto-encephalography (EEG/MEG), in order to make inferences about the orchestration of brain activity across distinct neuronal elements [3]. A prominent view is that these oscillations represent essential network activity. They become visible when neuronal elements of a network start to synchronize their oscillatory activity, i.e., temporarily couple together [4]. Notably, brain oscillations vary in frequencies depending on the task that is being executed and the region of the brain they are recorded from [3] (see Box 1 for example frequencies relevant for Helfrich et al.''s study). It is understood that this may reflect nested networks that oscillate at different frequencies and spatial scales [4] and that define functional architecture not only by synchronizing at the same frequency but also through complex cross-frequency interactions; this to allow for integration of processes at different temporal and spatial scales [5]–[7]. With respect to the above questions on how the brain operates, the most exciting aspect of oscillatory brain activity is probably that it offers mechanistic accounts. One example is the communication-through-coherence theory [8], which states that the relative timing of oscillatory activity of two neuronal elements enables the control of information transfer, with communication being maximal when phases of high excitability of these elements cycle in synchrony, and minimal when they cycle out of synchrony (see Fig. 1B Model).Open in a separate windowFigure 1Schematic representation of design, objectives, and insights from the study by Helfrich et al. A. Design and questions: Participants viewed an apparent motion stimulus, which elicits a bistable percept consisting of either horizontal (percept 1) or vertical motion (percept 2). A bi-hemispheric network of two posterior areas (blue and red squares) was interrogated as to the functionality of inter-area synchrony (see “?”) in generating these percepts, by recording of brain oscillations through electro-encephalography (EEG), and interventions into these oscillations through transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS). B. Results and conclusion: EEG revealed that the horizontal motion percept was associated with enhanced synchrony (coherence) between oscillatory brain activity of the two posterior areas (as compared to vertical motion percept), in line with coupling of the two areas to a functional network by synchronization of their respective phases of high excitability (see Model). This provides information on a correlative relationship between network activation and function but cannot disentangle whether it is the percept that drives the network, or the network that drives the percept. Intervention with tACS supports the latter. Applying tACS in synchrony over the two areas enhances inter-area coherence of oscillatory activity as well as the horizontal motion percept (as opposed to applying tACS out of synchrony). Hence, synchrony of oscillatory brain activity underlies the formation of functional networks and mediates its associated functions.

Box 1. Glossary

Brain oscillations in the gamma frequency band (gamma-oscillations): This is a class of brain oscillations cycling at rapid frequencies (35–100 Hz). Gamma-oscillations are prominent in visual cortex (among other areas) and become evident also in scalp recordings when participants view specific types of visual stimuli. Alpha-band brain oscillations cycle at 8–12 Hz. Alpha-oscillations can co-occur with gamma-oscillations in visual areas, where these two classes of oscillations show an inverse relationship in terms of amplitude. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) use electrical currents applied through two or more scalp electrodes for transient, non-invasive brain stimulation, whereas transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) uses the principle of electromagnetic induction. In tACS, the currents are modulated in an oscillatory (sinusoidal) pattern, and can therefore be frequency-tuned to underlying brain oscillations. Likewise, TMS in its rhythmic form (rhythmic TMS) allows for periodic brain stimulation at frequencies of brain oscillations.The other line of research that is at the heart of Helfrich et al.''s study is concerned with interventions into brain activity by non-invasive brain stimulation techniques; this to probe the brain–behaviour relationship along a more causal dimension [9]. Such techniques are widely used in cognitive and clinical neuroscience, and employ either magnetic or electric fields to stimulate neurons directly (i.e., transcranially) to then test the behavioural consequences. Currently available techniques use transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), or a variety of electrical currents such as with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) or transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) (see Box 1) [10]. While these techniques have been successfully employed in numerous studies, a recurrent question is how to improve specificity of effects in terms of enhancing focality [11] or targeting specific subpopulations within the stimulated neuronal pool [12]. In addition, simultaneous neuroimaging studies have revealed that the effect of the magnetic or electric field on the stimulated area (under the TMS coil or the stimulation electrode) is spreading to other areas, in many instances along anatomical connections [13],[14]. Hence, any behavioural outcome needs to be interpreted in the context of network effects. Intriguingly, and relevant for interactions with oscillatory brain activity, recent findings indicate that the specificity of these interventions into functionally relevant brain activity may be improved by taking into account not only the spatial dimension (i.e., what anatomical network to stimulate) but also the temporal dimension (what frequency to apply). This is suggested by recent studies using periodic transcranial stimulation protocols (such as tACS or rhythmic TMS) allowing a frequency tuning of stimulation (see Box 1). These studies demonstrate an immediate behavioural effect at specific stimulation frequencies, namely those that match the frequencies of intrinsic brain oscillations[15]–[21]; which may be caused by the periodic stimulation promoting the intrinsic oscillations [22]–[24].Capitalizing on the above, Helfrich et al. convincingly address in healthy human volunteers the long-standing issue of whether oscillatory brain activity indeed coordinates functional brain architecture, as opposed to representing a mere by-product, and thereby bridge a gap between recordings and interventional studies into brain oscillations (see Fig. 1 for a schematic representation of design, objectives, and insights of the study). They do so by examining the link between visual network activity and specific sensory experiences. To manipulate sensory experience (without changing sensory input), Helfrich et al. employed a visual motion paradigm (see Fig. 1A), in which pairs of diagonally opposed dots are presented on a screen in two alternating configurations (upper left/lower right dots followed by lower left/upper right dots, etc.). This leads to a bistable percept, consisting of time periods during which the two dots are perceived as moving horizontally (see Fig. 1A, apparent motion percept 1), alternating with time periods during which the same dots are perceived as moving vertically (Fig. 1A, apparent motion percept 2). Interestingly, recordings of brain oscillations from left and right occipito-parietal EEG sensors, i.e., from areas processing the right- versus left-sided dots respectively, revealed a temporally stable pattern of relative timing between these oscillations, depending on the percept (replicating [25]): during horizontal motion percepts when the demands for interhemispheric communication can be assumed to be high (as opposed to vertical percepts where motion integration can be resolved within each hemisphere) [26], these left and right oscillations show high coherence in the gamma frequency band (at approximately 35–100 Hz) (Fig. 1B EEG). In other words, oscillations in the left and right occipito-parietal areas are synchronized. This is suggestive of these areas forming a temporally stable network during horizontal as opposed to vertical motion integration, in line with models of network coordination by synchronization of brain oscillations (Fig. 1B Model) [8],[27]. Importantly, applying rhythmic brain stimulation in synchrony over the left and right occipito-parietal cortex using tACS at gamma frequency enhances both the gamma-band EEG coherence between the two hemispheres (without affecting gamma-power) and its associated percept (i.e., horizontal motion), as opposed to applying gamma-tACS out of synchrony (Fig. 1B tACS). See also Polania et al. [19] for a conceptually similar tACS result, without the direct evidence for concurrently enhanced EEG synchrony. This shows that in-synchrony tACS versus out-of-synchrony tACS over two elements of an oscillatory visual network can be used to stabilize/destabilize this network, and with meaningful perceptual consequences. This is in accord with brain oscillations not only indexing network coordination and associated functions, but causing them.The findings of Helfrich et al. make an important contribution. They more firmly link the dynamics of oscillatory brain activity to the formation of functional networks, as well as the orchestration of brain function (here phenomenological experience) and this along a causal dimension. This corroborates and extends a growing number of studies showing that brain oscillations can serve as targets for controlled interventions into brain activity and function, by non-invasive brain stimulation in periodic patterns [22]–[24]. The principle idea is to promote brain oscillations that have been associated with specific functions (as inferred from correlative brain-behavioural links) to cause performance changes, provided a causal relationship underlies the correlative data. For instance, it has been shown that promoting oscillations of the parietal cortex known to be related to attentional selection using frequency-tuned rhythmic TMS [22] biases perception towards the expected stimulus dimension [17],[20]. Likewise, tACS (or oscillatory tDCS) tuned to fronto-temporal oscillations, which have been associated with memory consolidation during slow-wave sleep or dream patterns during REM-sleep (e.g., lucid dreaming), have been shown to enhance memory or lucid dream content, respectively [15],[21]. And equivalent effects have been found for oscillatory motor system activity [16],[18]. This opens powerful opportunities for neuroscience and clinical interventions, not only allowing to test models of how brain activity implements function but also how it relates to dysfunction, to inform controlled intervention into the brain–behaviour relationship.These findings are exciting and indicate that it is promising to study brain oscillations, even at a macroscopic scale (such as measured with EEG/MEG), to answer some of the long-standing questions of how the brain works. They also take the emerging new approach of using periodic transcranial stimulation to interact with brain oscillations and function beyond the proof-of-principle stage. However, the usefulness of this approach will depend on the extent to which its specificity can be improved (e.g., up- versus down-regulating oscillations, tailoring to individual differences) and its mechanisms of actions understood. One unresolved point is the spatial extent of stimulation. With tACS, the conventional stimulation electrodes are large (several cm²) and require a “return” electrode which excites widespread areas. To render stimulation more focal, special electrode montages have been proposed [11], as also used by Helfrich et al., and which may explain some of the differences to a previous study of the same group using a less focal electrode montage [28]. Other developments are underway to funnel stimulation to specific target areas by the use of multichannel electrode configurations and computational (forward) models of electrical field distributions [29]. In this context, it will be of interest to compare the efficiency of frequency-tuned tACS with frequency-tuned rhythmic TMS, the latter thought to be more focal, but also more superficial. In addition, it is still largely unknown how these forms of rhythmic stimulation interact with intrinsic brain oscillations. There is growing evidence that the periodic electric or magnetic force may entrain the underlying oscillations during stimulation [22],[23], and that long-lasting effects may arise from this entrainment, possibly by inducing plasticity effects via spike-timing dependent plasticity in the circuits generating these oscillations [30]. It is the former, short-term effects that are of interest for experimental interventions in cognitive neuroscience for testing theory (because of their limited duration), but the latter, longer-lasting effects that are of relevance for clinical interventions. Finally, while Helfrich et al. report cross-frequency effects of gamma-tACS, in particular in the alpha frequency band (8–12 Hz), it remains to be studied in detail how the induced oscillations resonate in other, nested oscillatory networks. These and other points will need to be resolved in future work to be able to fully assess the extent of the impact of this emerging approach.