Interpreting bold: Towards a dialogue between cognitive and cellular neuroscience

Catherine N. Hall, Clare Howarth, Zebulun Kurth-Nelson, Anusha Mishra

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorial

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Cognitive neuroscience depends on the use of blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to probe brain function.Although commonly used as a surrogatemeasure of neuronal activity, BOLD signals actually reflect changes in brain blood oxygenation.Understanding the mechanisms linking neuronal activity to vascular perfusion is, therefore, critical in interpreting BOLD.Advances in cellular neuroscience demonstrating differences in this neurovascular relationship in different brain regions, conditions or pathologies are often not accounted for when interpreting BOLD.Meanwhile, within cognitive neuroscience, the increasing use of high magnetic field strengths and the development of model-based tasks and analyses have broadened the capability of BOLD signals to inform us about the underlying neuronal activity, but these methods are lesswell understood by cellular neuroscientists.In 2016, a Royal Society TheoMurphyMeeting brought scientists from the two communities together to discuss these issues.Here, we consolidate the main conclusions arising from that meeting.We discuss areas of consensus about what BOLD fMRI can tell us about underlying neuronal activity, and how advanced modelling techniques have improved our ability to use and interpret BOLD.We also highlight areas of controversy in understanding BOLD and suggest research directions required to resolve these issues.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number20150348
JournalPhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Volume371
Issue number1705
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 5 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

neurophysiology
Oxygenation
Blood
blood
Brain
brain
magnetic resonance imaging
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Cognitive Neuroscience
Aptitude
Pathology
Magnetic Fields
magnetic fields
Neurosciences
blood vessels
Blood Vessels
Consensus
Perfusion
Magnetic fields

Keywords

  • BOLD
  • Cellular neuroscience
  • Cognitive neuroscience
  • Disease
  • fMRI
  • Neurovascular

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

Cite this

Interpreting bold : Towards a dialogue between cognitive and cellular neuroscience. / Hall, Catherine N.; Howarth, Clare; Kurth-Nelson, Zebulun; Mishra, Anusha.

In: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, Vol. 371, No. 1705, 20150348, 05.10.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorial

@article{684f4463c16a4e94812af019f32bd0d9,
title = "Interpreting bold: Towards a dialogue between cognitive and cellular neuroscience",
abstract = "Cognitive neuroscience depends on the use of blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to probe brain function.Although commonly used as a surrogatemeasure of neuronal activity, BOLD signals actually reflect changes in brain blood oxygenation.Understanding the mechanisms linking neuronal activity to vascular perfusion is, therefore, critical in interpreting BOLD.Advances in cellular neuroscience demonstrating differences in this neurovascular relationship in different brain regions, conditions or pathologies are often not accounted for when interpreting BOLD.Meanwhile, within cognitive neuroscience, the increasing use of high magnetic field strengths and the development of model-based tasks and analyses have broadened the capability of BOLD signals to inform us about the underlying neuronal activity, but these methods are lesswell understood by cellular neuroscientists.In 2016, a Royal Society TheoMurphyMeeting brought scientists from the two communities together to discuss these issues.Here, we consolidate the main conclusions arising from that meeting.We discuss areas of consensus about what BOLD fMRI can tell us about underlying neuronal activity, and how advanced modelling techniques have improved our ability to use and interpret BOLD.We also highlight areas of controversy in understanding BOLD and suggest research directions required to resolve these issues.",
keywords = "BOLD, Cellular neuroscience, Cognitive neuroscience, Disease, fMRI, Neurovascular",
author = "Hall, {Catherine N.} and Clare Howarth and Zebulun Kurth-Nelson and Anusha Mishra",
year = "2016",
month = "10",
day = "5",
doi = "10.1098/rstb.2015.0348",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "371",
journal = "Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences",
issn = "0962-8436",
publisher = "The Royal Society",
number = "1705",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interpreting bold

T2 - Towards a dialogue between cognitive and cellular neuroscience

AU - Hall, Catherine N.

AU - Howarth, Clare

AU - Kurth-Nelson, Zebulun

AU - Mishra, Anusha

PY - 2016/10/5

Y1 - 2016/10/5

N2 - Cognitive neuroscience depends on the use of blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to probe brain function.Although commonly used as a surrogatemeasure of neuronal activity, BOLD signals actually reflect changes in brain blood oxygenation.Understanding the mechanisms linking neuronal activity to vascular perfusion is, therefore, critical in interpreting BOLD.Advances in cellular neuroscience demonstrating differences in this neurovascular relationship in different brain regions, conditions or pathologies are often not accounted for when interpreting BOLD.Meanwhile, within cognitive neuroscience, the increasing use of high magnetic field strengths and the development of model-based tasks and analyses have broadened the capability of BOLD signals to inform us about the underlying neuronal activity, but these methods are lesswell understood by cellular neuroscientists.In 2016, a Royal Society TheoMurphyMeeting brought scientists from the two communities together to discuss these issues.Here, we consolidate the main conclusions arising from that meeting.We discuss areas of consensus about what BOLD fMRI can tell us about underlying neuronal activity, and how advanced modelling techniques have improved our ability to use and interpret BOLD.We also highlight areas of controversy in understanding BOLD and suggest research directions required to resolve these issues.

AB - Cognitive neuroscience depends on the use of blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to probe brain function.Although commonly used as a surrogatemeasure of neuronal activity, BOLD signals actually reflect changes in brain blood oxygenation.Understanding the mechanisms linking neuronal activity to vascular perfusion is, therefore, critical in interpreting BOLD.Advances in cellular neuroscience demonstrating differences in this neurovascular relationship in different brain regions, conditions or pathologies are often not accounted for when interpreting BOLD.Meanwhile, within cognitive neuroscience, the increasing use of high magnetic field strengths and the development of model-based tasks and analyses have broadened the capability of BOLD signals to inform us about the underlying neuronal activity, but these methods are lesswell understood by cellular neuroscientists.In 2016, a Royal Society TheoMurphyMeeting brought scientists from the two communities together to discuss these issues.Here, we consolidate the main conclusions arising from that meeting.We discuss areas of consensus about what BOLD fMRI can tell us about underlying neuronal activity, and how advanced modelling techniques have improved our ability to use and interpret BOLD.We also highlight areas of controversy in understanding BOLD and suggest research directions required to resolve these issues.

KW - BOLD

KW - Cellular neuroscience

KW - Cognitive neuroscience

KW - Disease

KW - fMRI

KW - Neurovascular

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84984918843&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84984918843&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1098/rstb.2015.0348

DO - 10.1098/rstb.2015.0348

M3 - Editorial

C2 - 27574302

AN - SCOPUS:84984918843

VL - 371

JO - Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

JF - Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

SN - 0962-8436

IS - 1705

M1 - 20150348

ER -