Large-scale comparative neuroimaging: Where are we and what do we need?
Cortex. 2019-09-01; 118: 188-202
Read on PubMed
Thiebaut de Schotten M(1), Croxson PL(2), Mars RB(3).
(1)Brain Connectivity and Behaviour Group, Sorbonne Universities, Paris France; Frontlab, Institut du Cerveau et de la Moelle épinière (ICM), UPMC UMRS 1127, Inserm U 1127, CNRS UMR, Paris, France; Groupe d’Imagerie Neurofonctionnelle, Institut des Maladies Neurodégénératives-UMR 5293, CNRS, CEA University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France. Electronic address: .
(2)Friedman Brain Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA; Mortimer B. Zuckerman Mind Brain Behavior Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: .
(3)Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Centre for Functional MRI of the Brain (FMRIB), Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom; Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands. Electronic address: .
Neuroimaging has a lot to offer comparative neuroscience. Although invasive “gold standard” techniques have a better spatial resolution, neuroimaging allows fast, whole-brain, repeatable, and multi-modal measurements of structure and function in living animals and post-mortem tissue. In the past years, comparative neuroimaging has increased in popularity. However, we argue that its most significant potential lies in its ability to collect large-scale datasets of many species to investigate principles of variability in brain organisation across
whole orders of species-an ambition that is presently unfulfilled but achievable. We briefly review the current state of the field and explore what the current obstacles to such an approach are. We propose some calls to action.
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.