ArticleBiology of sex differences2025
A cross-species analysis of neuroanatomical covariance sex differences in humans and mice.
Article in Biology of sex differences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStructural covariance within the brain is thought to reflect inter-regional sharing of developmental influences. This hypothesis has proved difficult to test but can be informatively probed by the study of sex differences. Here, we use neuroimaging in humans and mice to study sex-differences in anatomical covariance- asking (1) are there sex differences in structural covariance and (2) do regions that share the same developmental influences, as exhibited by shared sex differences in volume, also show shared sex differences in volume covariance. This study design illuminates both the biology of sex-differences and theoretical models for anatomical covariance- benefitting from tests of inter-species convergence.
methodsBrain volume correlations for males and females across 255 regions in mice (n = 423) and 378 regions in humans (n = 436) were calculated using volumetric measures obtained from structural MRI. Mean correlations for each sex were compared within species to determine whether covariance sex differences exist. Specific covariances with strong sex differences in each species were identified via permutation tests for statistical significance. Brain maps of regional average structural covariance sex-bias were generated for mice and humans. Regional average structural covariance sex-bias and volumetric sex-bias were correlated to identify whether these features align in their direction of sex-bias.
resultsWe find that volumetric structural covariance is stronger in adult females than males for both wild-type mice and healthy human subjects: 98% of comparisons with statistically significant covariance sex differences in mice are female-biased, while 76% of such comparisons are female-biased in humans (q < 0.05). Regional covariance and volumetric sex-biases have weak inverse relationships to each other in both species: volumetrically male-biased regions contain more female-biased covariations, while volumetrically female-biased regions have more male-biased covariations (mice: r = -0.185, p = 0.002; humans: r = -0.189, p = 0.001).
conclusionsOur results identify a tendency for females to show stronger neuroanatomical covariance across species. These structural covariance sex differences are also partially related to regional sex differences in volume for both species, suggesting that stronger structural covariance in females could be an evolutionarily conserved feature - partially shaped by the same developmental influences that mediate volumetric sex-biases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.