Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19486538›Full record

ArticleBMC neuroscience2009

Symbiotic relationship between brain structure and dynamics.

Mikail Rubinov, Olaf Sporns, Cees van Leeuwen, Michael Breakspear

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC neuroscience, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 97 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
97citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

97 citing papers in PubMed, 212 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. A Neural Model for V1 That Incorporates Dendritic Nonlinearities and Backpropagating Action Potentials.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Bayesian Inference of a Spectral Graph Model for Brain Oscillations.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Adaptive rewiring in nonuniform coupled oscillators.Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2022
    Article

37 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Mikail RubinovBlack Dog Institute and School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. m.rubinov@student.unsw.edu.au
Olaf Sporns
Cees van Leeuwen
Michael Breakspear
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation · AUIndiana University Bloomington · USQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute · AURIKEN Center for Brain Science · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBrain structure and dynamics are interdependent through processes such as activity-dependent neuroplasticity. In this study, we aim to theoretically examine this interdependence in a model of spontaneous cortical activity. To this end, we simulate spontaneous brain dynamics on structural connectivity networks, using coupled nonlinear maps. On slow time scales structural connectivity is gradually adjusted towards the resulting functional patterns via an unsupervised, activity-dependent rewiring rule. The present model has been previously shown to generate cortical-like, modular small-world structural topology from initially random connectivity. We provide further biophysical justification for this model and quantitatively characterize the relationship between structure, function and dynamics that accompanies the ensuing self-organization.

resultsWe show that coupled chaotic dynamics generate ordered and modular functional patterns, even on a random underlying structural connectivity. Consequently, structural connectivity becomes more modular as it rewires towards these functional patterns. Functional networks reflect the underlying structural networks on slow time scales, but significantly less so on faster time scales. In spite of ordered functional topology, structural networks remain robustly interconnected--and therefore small-world--due to the presence of central, inter-modular hub nodes. The noisy dynamics of these hubs enable them to persist despite ongoing rewiring and despite their comparative absence in functional networks.

conclusionOur results outline a theoretical mechanism by which brain dynamics may facilitate neuroanatomical self-organization. We find time scale dependent differences between structural and functional networks. These differences are likely to arise from the distinct dynamics of central structural nodes.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalNonlinear DynamicsAnimalsBrainBrain MappingComputer SimulationHumansNeural Networks, ComputerNeural PathwaysNeuronal PlasticitySymbiosis

Identifiers

PMID19486538
PMCPMC2700812
OpenAlexW2056423697

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.