Longitudinal microstructural changes in 18 amygdala nuclei resonate with cortical circuits and phenomics.

The amygdala nuclei modulate distributed neural circuits that most likely evolved to respond to environmental threats and opportunities. So far, the specific role of unique amygdala nuclei in the context processing of salient environmental cues lacks adequate characterization across neural systems and over time. Here, we present amygdala nuclei morphometry and behavioral findings from longitudinal population data (>1400 subjects, age range 40-69 years, sampled 2-3 years apart): the UK Biobank offers exceptionally rich phenotyping along with brain morphology scans. This allows us to quantify how 18 microanatomical amygdala subregions undergo plastic changes in tandem with coupled neural systems and delineating their associated phenome-wide profiles. In the context of population change, the basal, lateral, accessory basal, and paralaminar nuclei change in lockstep with the prefrontal cortex, a region that subserves planning and decision-making. The central, medial and cortical nuclei are structurally coupled with the insular and anterior-cingulate nodes of the salience network, in addition to the MT/V5, basal ganglia, and putamen, areas proposed to represent internal bodily states and mediate attention to environmental cues. The central nucleus and anterior amygdaloid area are longitudinally tied with the inferior parietal lobule, known for a role in bodily awareness and social attention. These population-level amygdala-brain plasticity regimes in turn are linked with unique collections of phenotypes, ranging from social status and employment to sleep habits and risk taking. The obtained structural plasticity findings motivate hypotheses about the specific functions of distinct amygdala nuclei in humans.

Multivariate analytical approaches for investigating brain-behavior relationships.

Background: Many studies of brain-behavior relationships rely on univariate approaches where each variable of interest is tested independently, which does not allow for the simultaneous investigation of multiple correlated variables. Alternatively, multivariate approaches allow for examining relationships between psychopathology and neural substrates simultaneously. There are multiple multivariate methods to choose from that each have assumptions which can affect the results; however, many studies employ one method without a clear justification for its selection. Additionally, there are few studies illustrating how differences between methods manifest in examining brain-behavior relationships. The purpose of this study was to exemplify how the choice of multivariate approach can change brain-behavior interpretations. Method: We used data from 9,027 9- to 10-year-old children from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive DevelopmentSM Study (ABCD Study®) to examine brain-behavior relationships with three commonly used multivariate approaches: canonical correlation analysis (CCA), partial least squares correlation (PLSC), and partial least squares regression (PLSR). We examined the associations between psychopathology dimensions including general psychopathology, attention-deficit/hyperactivity symptoms, conduct problems, and internalizing symptoms with regional brain volumes. Results: The results of CCA, PLSC, and PLSR showed both consistencies and differences in the relationship between psychopathology symptoms and brain structure. The leading significant component yielded by each method demonstrated similar patterns of associations between regional brain volumes and psychopathology symptoms. However, the additional significant components yielded by each method demonstrated differential brain-behavior patterns that were not consistent across methods. Conclusion: Here we show that CCA, PLSC, and PLSR yield slightly different interpretations regarding the relationship between child psychopathology and brain volume. In demonstrating the divergence between these approaches, we exemplify the importance of carefully considering the method's underlying assumptions when choosing a multivariate approach to delineate brain-behavior relationships.