Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro

eNeuro

Advanced Search

 

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT
PreviousNext
Research ArticleResearch Article: New Research, Cognition and Behavior

Gray Matter Variation in the Posterior Superior Temporal Gyrus Is Associated with Polymorphisms in the KIAA0319 Gene in Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)

William D. Hopkins, Nicky Staes, Michele M. Mulholland, Steven J. Schapiro, Madeleine Rosenstein, Cheryl Stimpson, Brenda J. Bradley and Chet C. Sherwood
eNeuro 23 November 2021, 8 (6) ENEURO.0169-21.2021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0169-21.2021
William D. Hopkins
1Department of Comparative Medicine, Michale E Keeling Center for Comparative Medicine and Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Bastrop, TX 78602
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nicky Staes
2Department of Anthropology and Center for the Advanced Study of Human Paleobiology, The George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052
3Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium 2000
4Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium 2000
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michele M. Mulholland
1Department of Comparative Medicine, Michale E Keeling Center for Comparative Medicine and Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Bastrop, TX 78602
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Michele M. Mulholland
Steven J. Schapiro
1Department of Comparative Medicine, Michale E Keeling Center for Comparative Medicine and Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Bastrop, TX 78602
5Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark 1017
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Madeleine Rosenstein
2Department of Anthropology and Center for the Advanced Study of Human Paleobiology, The George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cheryl Stimpson
6Department of Pathology, Uniformed Services University, Bethesda, MD 20817
7Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, MD 20817
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brenda J. Bradley
2Department of Anthropology and Center for the Advanced Study of Human Paleobiology, The George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Chet C. Sherwood
2Department of Anthropology and Center for the Advanced Study of Human Paleobiology, The George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Determining the impact that the KIAA0319 gene has on primate brain morphology can provide insight into the evolution of human cognition and language systems. Here, we tested whether polymorphisms in KIAA0319 in chimpanzees account for gray matter volumetric variation in brain regions implicated in language and communication (particularly within the posterior superior temporal gyrus and inferior frontal gyrus). First, we identified the nature and frequencies of single nucleotide variants (SNVs) in KIAA0319 in a sample of unrelated chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes spp.). Next, we genotyped a subset of SNVs (those important for gene regulation or likely to alter protein structure/function) in a sample of chimpanzees for which in vivo T1-structural magnetic resonance imaging scans had been obtained. We then used source-based morphometry (SBM) to test for whole-brain gray matter covariation differences between chimpanzees with different KIAA0319 alleles. Finally, using histologic sections of 15 postmortem chimpanzee brains, we analyzed microstructural variation related to KIAA0319 polymorphisms in the posterior superior temporal cortex. We found that the SNVs were associated with variation in gray matter within several brain regions, including the posterior superior temporal gyrus (a region associated with language comprehension and production in humans). The microstructure analysis further revealed hemispheric differences in neuropil fraction, indicating that KIAA0319 expression may be involved in regulation of processes related to the formation and maintenance of synapses, dendrites, or axons within regions associated with communication.

  • chimpanzees
  • communication
  • gray matter
  • KIAA0319
  • language
  • neuropil fraction

Significance Statement

Studying the impact of language-related genes on primate brain morphology can provide insight into the evolution of human cognition and language systems. Here, we show that two KIAA0319 variants in chimpanzees are linked to differences in gray matter volume of the posterior superior temporal gyrus, a region associated with language comprehension and production in humans. Examination of the microstructure of this region showed that one KIAA0319 variant is associated with hemispheric differences in neuropil fraction, indicating that KIAA0319 expression may be involved in the formation and maintenance of synapses, dendrites, or axons within a region directly involved in communication. Together, these findings suggest that KIAA0319 variants may underlie individual variation in auditory processing and associated brain regions in nonhuman primates.

Introduction

Characterizing the behavioral, neural and genomic systems that distinguish humans from other primates has been a central focus of comparative research. In humans, there are several key connected brain regions implicated in the production and comprehension of language, particularly within the left hemisphere, including the basal ganglia, supplemental motor, inferior frontal, and posterior superior temporal gyri (Goulven and Tzourio-mazoyer, 2004; Friederici, 2015; Skeide et al., 2016). Further, studies have discovered several genes that account for individual and phylogenetic variation in linguistic functions and their underlying neural systems (Fisher and Marcus, 2006; Fisher and Scharff, 2009; Preuss, 2012; Pfenning et al., 2014). Arguably, the most well-known so-called language gene is FOXP2 (Lai et al., 2001; Enard et al., 2002). Individuals with a FOXP2 R553H missense mutation exhibit oro-facial dyspraxia and concomitant decrements in gray matter volume in the basal ganglia, supplemental motor area, anterior cingulate, and inferior frontal gyrus (Vargha-Khadem et al., 2005).

The gene KIAA0319 has similarly been implicated in language functions of humans. KIAA0319 polymorphisms have been repeatedly associated with developmental dyslexia, a reading disorder marked by difficulties learning associations between sounds with letters and/or written words (Cope et al., 2005; Dennis et al., 2009; Scerri et al., 2011; Luciano et al., 2013; Sun et al., 2014). Meta-analyses have revealed that individuals with dyslexia show atypical patterns of gray matter volume, cortical thickness, and white matter connectivity in brain regions implicated in language (Eckert et al., 2016; Mascheretti et al., 2017). Furthermore, KIAA0319 single nucleotide variants (SNVs) are associated with the prevalence of dyslexia and linked to differences in gray and white matter cortical organization, particularly within the posterior superior temporal lobe and parietal junction within the left hemisphere (Darki et al., 2012; Pinel et al., 2012; Jamadar et al., 2013; Eicher et al., 2016; Ozernov-Palchik and Gaab, 2016).

Studying the impact of variation in genes like KIAA0319 on primate brain morphology can provide insight into the evolution of human cognition and language systems by clarifying the functional role of genetic variation in shaping neural circuits. To this end, we tested whether chimpanzee KIAA0319 polymorphisms account for gray matter variation in brain regions implicated in language, particularly the posterior superior temporal and inferior frontal gyri. Comparative studies in nonhuman primates have shown that these regions play a role in the production and processing of species-specific communicative signals and vocalizations (Heffner and Heffner, 1984; Poremba et al., 2003, 2004; Gil-da-Costa et al., 2006; Petkov et al., 2008; Taglialatela et al., 2009). There is also evidence that chimpanzees, and to a lesser extent some monkeys, exhibit population-level morphologic and cellular asymmetries in the inferior frontal gyrus and superior temporal cortex, which overlap with Wernicke’s area in the human brain (Hopkins and Nir, 2010; Spocter et al., 2010; Lyn et al., 2011; Marie et al., 2018), one of the main regions influenced by KIAA0319 polymorphisms. What remains unknown is whether individual variation in morphology or function in these brain regions is associated with KIAA0319 polymorphisms in chimpanzees.

To test this hypothesis, we initially identified the frequencies of KIAA0319 SNVs in a sample of unrelated chimpanzees. Next, we selected SNVs of interest for further genotype-phenotype study. We focused on SNVs present in the 5′ upstream region of the gene (likely important for gene regulation as they are in or near the promoter region and transcription start site of the gene), as well as nonsynonymous SNVs in the coding region of the gene (these cause amino acid changes and therefore are more likely to alter structure and/or function of the protein). Next, we genotyped these SNVs in a sample of chimpanzees for which in vivo T1-structural magnetic resonance imaging scans had previously been obtained. We used source-based morphometry (SBM) to examine whole-brain gray matter covariation differences across KIAA0319 SNVs. Additionally, we analyzed microstructural variation related to KIAA0319 polymorphisms in the posterior superior temporal cortex from histologic sections of postmortem chimpanzee brains.

Materials and Methods

Subjects

In the current study, we used archival structural T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging scans obtained from 136 adult captive chimpanzees (79 females and 57 males). Captive chimpanzees in the United States descended from a founder population that was >95% from the western subspecies (Pan troglodytes verus; Ely et al., 2005). The subjects were socially housed at the National Center for Chimpanzee Care (NCCC), which is part of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. The NCCC facilities have indoor/outdoor enclosures with climbing structures, bedding, and daily environmental enrichment (Neal Webb et al., 2018). All chimpanzees had 24-h access to both indoor and outdoor areas except during cleaning. Care staff fed the chimpanzees a diet of commercially available primate chow and fresh produce multiple times per day, as well as several daily foraging opportunities and ad libitum access to water. All work was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at NCCC, followed the guidelines of the Institute of Medicine on the use of chimpanzees in research, and complied with the Society for Neuroscience Policy on Ethics.

Identifying SNVs

Initial quantification of genetic variation in chimpanzees was done using publicly available whole genome data [P. troglodytes troglodytes N = 18, P. troglodytes verus N = 12, P. troglodytes schweinfurthii N = 16, P. troglodytes ellioti N = 10, P. troglodytes (unknown subspecies) N = 3; Prado-Martinez et al., 2013; De Manuel et al., 2016]. The genomes were mapped to the human genome (version hg19) using BWA-MEM v0.7.5a-r405 (http://bio-bwa.sourceforge.net/bwa.shtml) with default parameters. After removing duplicates using PICARD v1.91 (https://sourceforge.net/projects/picard/files/picard-tools/1.91/), SNVs were called using GATK UnifiedGenotyper (https://software.broadinstitute.org/gatk/documentation/tooldocs/current/org_broadinstitute_gatk_tools_walkers_genotyper_UnifiedGenotyper.php). Gene consensus sequences were built for each individual using vcfconsensus (http://vcftools.sourceforge.net/man_latest.html). Intronic regions were removed from the sequences and remaining promoter region and exons were aligned to the human KIAA0319 reference sequence (Ensembl: ENSG00000137261) using Geneious (version 6.0.6).

Next, to confirm the presence and allele frequencies of the genetic variants in the population of chimpanzees for which we have matching neuroanatomical data, we genotyped the SNVs that showed variation in genome data for P. troglodytes verus in an additional set of 25 presumed unrelated chimpanzees. Only variants that showed minor allele frequencies >5% were then genotyped for the complete population. To infer the putative functional consequences of the resulting coding variants, we used SNAP2 (Hecht et al., 2015), a trained classifier based on a machine-learning device called a “neural network.” It distinguishes between effect and neutral variants/nonsynonymous SNVs by taking a variety of sequence and variant features into account. The effect of a variant is believed to be of importance to the native protein function if the SNAP2 score exceeds 50, is neutral if the score is below −50 and is unreliable when between 50 and −50.

DNA extraction and genotyping

For the chimpanzees with matching neuroanatomical data, genomic DNA was extracted from 200-μl blood samples using the QIAampDNA Mini kit automated on a QiaCube (QIAGEN), following the manufacturer’s instructions. The DNA extract was recovered in 200 μl of elution buffer and kept frozen at –20°C. Negative extraction controls showed no evidence of DNA contamination. DNA concentrations were quantified using a Nanodrop 2000 (Thermo-Fisher Scientific) spectrophotometer. Subsequent genotyping of the SNVs of interest was done using either Sanger sequencing or High-Resolution Melt Analysis (Smith et al., 2010). For exons where multiple SNVs were present in relatively short fragments (<500 bp), exons were amplified using PCR. Primers were developed flanking the region with the SNVs (exon 4, forward CTT GGA AAC CAC CAG AAT CAT GCG G and reverse CTT TCT CCA ACA CCT CTC CTG AAG; exon 18, forward CTC AGC CCT ACA CAC CTC TTT G and reverse AAG CCT CCT CTA TAC CAG AAC TC). The 25-μl PCR mix contained 10.5 μl MasterMix (QIAGEN; HotStarTaq plus DNA polymerase, deoxynucleotides, and MgCl2), 2.0 μl primer mix (10 mm concentration of combined forward and reverse primers) and ∼5–20 ng of genomic DNA (quantified via a NanoDrop microvolume spectrophotometer). PCR started with an initial activation at 95°C (5 min), followed by 35 cycles of denaturing at 95°C (10 s), annealing at 54°C (30 s) and extension at 72°C (1 min), with a final extension period of 10 min at 72°C. All reactions included positive and no-template controls. The amplicons were then Sanger sequenced on an Applied Biosystems platform following manufacturer’s specifications at the Yale DNA Analysis Facility. For <100-bp exon sequences where only one SNV site was present, High-Resolution Melt Analysis (as in Jacobs et al., 2016) was used to assess genotypes. Primer pairs flanking the SNVs were designed to target a short segment (∼100 bp) containing the single polymorphic site (chr6:24899739, forward CTG ACT GAG ACT GGG AAC and reverse CTG TGG TTT AGA TTA TCA CG; chr6:24900865, forward GCA ATT CGT GAG GTT GGG and reverse GCC CTG AGT TCA GAA GG; chr6:24828663, forward GAA TGG AAA CCA GAG CAG TG and reverse ATG GAG AAC TTG CCT GCA TGA). All qPCRs and melting curves were generated on a Rotor-Gene Q (QIAGEN) platform. The 25 μL qPCR mix contained 12.5 μL HRM MasterMix (QIAGEN; HotStarTaq plus DNA polymerase, EvaGreen dye, Q-Solution, deoxynucleotides, and MgCl2), 1.75 μl primer mix (10 mm concentration forward and reverse primers) and ∼20 ng of genomic DNA (quantified via a NanoDrop microvolume spectrophotometer). qPCR started with an initial activation at 95°C (5 min), followed by 40 cycles of denaturing at 95°C (10 s), annealing at 54°C (30 s) 72°C (40 s) and a final extension period of 10 min at 72°C. In each reaction, no-template controls were included. Data on melting curves and temperature of qPCR products were generated immediately following amplification by increasing temperatures from 65°C to 95°C, rising by 0.1°C/2 s. Fluorescence data were plotted as a function of temperature during DNA denaturation (melting) and visualized and compared using the Rotor-Gene Q HRM software package (QIAGEN). The resulting melting temperatures and curve shapes were assigned to different genotypes based on previously established reference curves (as in Jacobs et al., 2016) of known variants. Genotypes were confirmed using multiple independent qPCR and high-resolution melt analyses (mean = 2.76 replicates per sample). Additionally, for each melting curve-based genotype, we Sanger sequenced 10% of the samples to validate and confirm the genotype (Applied Biosystems Genetic Analyzer, DNA Analysis Facility at Yale University). Multiple alignments of the resulting DNA sequences were performed using Geneious (version 6.0.6).

Magnetic resonance image acquisition

We previously obtained magnetic resonance images using methods described elsewhere (Bogart et al., 2014; Bard and Hopkins, 2018; Mulholland et al., 2020). No new magnetic resonance images were collected for this study. Briefly, subjects were initially immobilized by injection of ketamine (10 mg/kg) or telazol (2–6 mg/kg) and subsequently anesthetized with propofol (40–60 mg/kg) per standard institutional guidelines. The subjects were then transported to the imaging facility and remained anesthetized for the duration of the scan (40–60 min depending on brain size), as well as during transportation back to a recovery cage (∼75–120 min in total). The subjects were placed in the scanner chamber in a supine position with their head inside the human-head coil. The chimpanzees were scanned using a 1.5-Tesla scanner and T1-weighted images were collected in the transverse plane using a gradient echo protocol (pulse repetition = 19 ms, echo time = 8.5 ms, number of signals averaged = 8, and a 256 × 256 matrix). After completing the magnetic resonance imaging scan collection, the subjects were temporarily housed in a single cage for several hours to allow them to recover from the anesthesia, after which they were returned to their social group.

Postimage processing and analyses

The archival magnetic resonance imaging data were processed on a Macintosh computer using previously described methods (Mulholland et al., 2020). First, we imported the raw DICOM files into 3D Slicer 4 (www.slicer.org) and converted each into NIfTI format (Fedorov et al., 2012; Kikinis et al., 2014). Next, we used the BET function in FSL for skull-stripping, using fractional intensity thresholds ranging between 0.35 and 0.80 (Smith, 2002; Jenkinson et al., 2005). The skull-stripped brains were then imported into 3D Slicer for N4ITK bias correction (spline distance = 50, bias field = 0.15, convergent threshold = 0.001; Boyes et al., 2008; Tustison and Gee, 2009; Tustison et al., 2010, 2014). Using the MRI Denoising Package for MATLAB (R2015b; MathWorks), the scans were then denoised using an optimized nonlocal means denoising filter (Coupe et al., 2008). The scans were then resampled at 0.625 isotropic voxels and aligned in radiologic space in Analyze 11.0 (AnalyzeDirect), using a capsule placed during the imaging process as a left-right orientation marker. Finally, we used the FLIRT function in FSL to perform a 12-parameter affine linear registration (Jenkinson and Smith, 2001; Jenkinson et al., 2002) of the processed scan to a chimpanzee template brain (Hopkins and Avants, 2013).

We used the FSL-VBM pipeline (http://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/FSLVBM) to process each preprocessed scan. The FSL-VBM pipeline included (1) segmentation of each scan into gray and white matter, (2) linear registration of each scan to a standard chimpanzee template (Hopkins and Avants, 2013), (3) creation of a study-specific gray matter template (Smith et al., 2004; Andersson et al., 2007; Douaud et al., 2007), (4) nonlinear registration of each subject’s gray matter images to the study-specific template, (5) modulation of the gray matter volume by use of a Jacobian warp to correct for local expansion or contraction of gray matter within each voxel, and (6) smoothing with an isotropic Gaussian kernel with a σ of 2 mm.

SBM and statistical analyses

Following previously described methods (Hopkins et al., 2019; Mulholland et al., 2020), we subjected the individual modulated gray matter volume produced in the FSL-VBM pipeline to perform SBM using the software program GIFT (https://trendscenter.org/software/gift/). SBM is a relatively new method used to characterize gray and white matter structural covariation in samples of magnetic resonance imaging scans (Alexander-Bloch et al., 2013; Bard and Hopkins, 2018). Unlike univariate analytic methods, such as voxel-based morphometry, SBM is a multivariate, data-driven analytic approach that utilizes information about relationships among voxels to group voxels carrying similar information across the brain. Without requiring prior determination of regions of interest, the resulting components or sources are identified based on the spatial information between voxels grouped in a natural manner and represent similar covariation networks between subjects; thus, this approach has been described as a multivariate version of voxel-based morphometry (Xu et al., 2009). At the individual level, GIFT outputs weighted scores for each component that reflect the relative contribution of each subject’s gray matter volume to their generation. For this sample of chimpanzees, the SBM analysis yielded eight components. The weighted scores for each of the eight components were the dependent measures in the subsequent multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA). Sex and KIAA0319 SNV alleles were the independent variables, while genetic relatedness was the covariate.

Microstructural analyses of the posterior superior temporal cortex (area Tpt)

In addition to the in vivo SBM analysis, we selected area Tpt for histologic analysis because it overlaps with one of the larger gray matter regions that differed between chimpanzees in the SBM analysis. For histologic sectioning, tissue blocks were frozen on dry ice, and cut at 40 μm on a freezing sliding microtome. Every 10th section (spaced 400 μm apart) from each block was mounted on chromalum-subbed slides, stained using 0.5% cresyl violet to visualize cytoarchitecture, and coverslipped with DPX.

We quantified the neuropil fraction from the posterior superior temporal cortex (area Tpt) in the postmortem brains of 15 chimpanzees (ages 12–48 years, mean 32.6 years; seven female, eight male). The neuropil is defined as the space between neuronal and glial cell bodies, which is comprised of dendrites, axons, synapses, and microvasculature (Spocter et al., 2012). The neuropil fraction data came from previously published data in 12 individuals from Spocter et al. (2012), supplemented by an additional three brains measured for the current study, which had been processed more recently for histology. Neuropil fraction was measured using high-resolution images of these Nissl-stained sections. Imaging of the regions of interest was performed with a Zeiss Axioplan 2 photomicroscope (Zeiss) equipped with a Ludi XY motorized stage (Ludl Electronics), Heidenhain z-axis encoder, and an Optronics MicroFire color video camera coupled to a Dell PC using Stereoinvestigator software (MBF Bioscience). For each chimpanzee brain, three evenly spaced coronal sections were sampled throughout the region of interest. For each section, regions of interest were contoured under low magnification (2.5× objective lens) underneath a representative portion of the area (for cortical regions this was ∼3 mm in length along the cortical surface). At least 30 systematically random sampled images were taken within the contours of each section using a 20× objective lens, resulting in images at 0.53 pixels/μm resolution. Each image was imported into ImageJ (v.1.32j) and subjected to background subtraction with a rolling ball radius of 50 pixels and then converted to binary by an automated threshold routine (Spocter et al., 2012). Before calculation of the neuropil fraction, images that contained artifacts were removed from the batch and the remaining images were blind-coded to avoid observer bias.

We also analyzed previously published data on regional volume, total neuron number, and neuron density from area Tpt in 12 chimpanzees (Spocter et al., 2010). In brief, stereologic methods were used, including Cavalieri point counting to calculate the regional volumes of area Tpt, and optical fractionator sampling to estimate neuron numbers. In the cresyl violet Nissl-stained sections, neurons were distinguished from glial cells by the presence of a large, lightly stained nucleus and a distinct nucleolus, accompanied by lightly stained dendritic processes. Stereologic counts of neuron numbers based on cresyl violet Nissl-staining have been shown to produce results that are highly correlated with other methods of labeling neurons, such as NeuN immunostaining (Zhu et al., 2015).

We ran a series of multivariate general linear models using Type III sum of squares with each dependent measure of cortical area Tpt neuropil fraction, regional volume, neuron number, and neuron density in the left and right hemisphere, with sex, age, and brain mass as covariates, and all three KIAA0319 genotypes as fixed factors. We also analyzed the asymmetry quotient (AQ; right – left/average of hemispheres) of neuropil fraction using general linear models with sex, age, and brain mass as covariates.

Results

KIAA0319 genetic variation

We identified 33 SNVs in chimpanzee KIAA0319 5′ flanking region and coding regions combined (see Table 1). Out of 33 SNVs, four were in the upstream flanking region and 29 were in the amino acid coding region. A total of 18 out of 29 SNVs were nonsynonymous variants, and only two of these were present in P. troglodytes verus: chr6:24841281: C/A in exon 4 resulting in a Val295Phe substitution, and chr6:24828663: A/C in exon 10 resulting in a Glu563Asp substitution. Next, we genotyped these two SNVs in our population of chimpanzees with matching neuroanatomical data and found that only chr6:24828663: A/C showed minor allele frequencies >5% and was thus suitable for further genotype-phenotype analysis. Genotype frequencies for this SNV (hereafter referred to as KIAA0391_Glu563Asp) were in Hardy Weinberg equilibrium (χ2 = 0.52, df = 1, p = 0.47) and SNAP2 prediction of its functional consequences resulted in a modest SNAP2 effect score of 35 (expected accuracy 66%).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Chimpanzee KIAA0319 genetic variation

Out of the four SNVs present in the promoter flanking region, two were in complete linkage disequilibrium in our chimpanzee population (chr6:24899739:T/A and chr6:24899753:C/A), therefore only one was included in further genotype-phenotype analysis. A third SNV (chr6:24899741:C/G) did not exceed the >5% minor allele threshold and was also excluded from further analysis. For the two promoter region flanking region SNVs that were included in the analysis, genotype frequencies were in Hardy Weinberg equilibrium (chr6:24899739:T/A χ2 = 3.79, df = 1, p = 0.05; chr6:24900865:A/G χ2 = 2.84, df = 1, p = 0.09; hereafter referred to as KIAA0391rsP1 and KIAA0391rsP4, respectively). The specific SNVs used in the subsequent analyses are highlighted in Table 1.

KIAA0319 and gray matter covariation

For KIAA0319rsP1, the MANCOVA revealed a significant main effect for genotype F(16,246) = 2.086, p = 0.01. Subsequent univariate F-tests revealed significant differences between the alleles for SBM component 1 (C1) F(2,129) = 4.186, p = 0.017 and component 2 (C2) F(2,129) = 6.394, p = 0.002 (Fig. 1A). Post hoc analysis for C1 indicated that chimpanzees with the AA allele had higher weighted scores compared with AT and TT individuals, but the AT and TT means did not differ significantly from each other. For C2, post hoc analysis indicated that the means for the AA, AT, and TT groups all differed significantly from each other (Fig. 1B). No other SBM components differed across the KIAA0319rsP1 alleles. For KIAA0319rsP4, the results were very similar. The MANCOVA revealed a significant main effect for KIAA0319 genotype F(16,244) = 2.790, p = 0.007. Univariate F-tests revealed significant main effects of the SNV genotype on C1 F(2,128) = 3.810, p = 0.025 and C2 F(2,128) = 5.884, p = 0.004 (Fig. 1A). Post hoc analysis for component C1 indicated that chimpanzees with the minor AA allele had lower weighted scores compared with GG, but not GT individuals. By contrast, for C2, post hoc analysis indicated that AA had significantly higher values than GG but did not differ from AG apes (Fig. 1C). No other SBM components differed across the KIAA0319rsP4 alleles. For the KIAA0319 Glu563Asp variant, the MANCOVA revealed no significant main effects or interactions. Notwithstanding, the univariate F-tests revealed a significant main effect for the genotype on C7 F(2,1298) = 3.980, p = 0.046 (Fig. 2A). Chimpanzees with the major AC allele had lower weighted scores than individuals with the CC but not AA allele (Fig. 2B). No other SBM components differed across the KIAA0319 Glu563Asp alleles. (Note, see Fig. 3 for a chimpanzee atlas map; Vickery et al., 2020.)

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

A, 3D renderings of SBM C1 and C2 (from left to right: right, left, top, and bottom views), and mean (±SE) SBM weighted scores for each allele of (B) KIAA0319rsP1 and (C) KIAA0319rsP4. B, Chimpanzees with the AA allele had higher weighted SBM scores on C1 compared with AT and TT individuals but the AT and TT means did not differ significantly from each other. For component two, AA, AT, and TT groups all differed significantly from each other. C, For KIAA0319rsP4, chimpanzees with the minor AA allele had lower weighted SBM scores for C1 compared with GG but not GT individuals. By contrast, for C2, chimpanzees with AA had significantly higher values than GG but did not differ from AG chimpanzees.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

A, 3D renderings of SBM component 7 (from left to right: right, left, top, and bottom views). B, Mean (±SE) SBM weighted scores for each allele of the KIAA0319 Glu563Asp variant. Chimpanzees with the major AC allele had lower weighted SBM scores for component 7 than individuals with the CC but not AA allele.

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

Lateral and medial views of the right hemisphere Davi130 parcellation of the chimpanzee brain, region numbers correspond to names in the figure. Reprinted with permission (Vickery et al., 2020).

KIAA0319 and microstructure in posterior superior temporal cortex (area Tpt)

We ran a series of multivariate general linear models with each dependent measure of cortical area Tpt microstructure in the left and right hemisphere with sex, age, and brain mass as covariates, and all three KIAA0319 genotypes as fixed factors. Of these models, the only effect that approached a conventional statistical threshold was the KIAA0319rsP1 genotype on right hemisphere neuropil fraction; F(2,10) = 10.266, p = 0.089) (see Table 2). The covariates sex, age, and brain mass did not have significant between-subjects effects. To further examine lateralization in cortical area Tpt microstructure, we also analyzed the AQ of each variable using general linear models with sex, age, and brain mass as covariates. Of these models, the only effect that approached a conventional statistical threshold was the KIAA0319rsP1 genotype on AQ of neuropil fraction; F(2,10) = 14.553, p = 0.064. The covariates sex, age, and brain mass did not have significant between-subjects effects. Photomicrographs and results can be seen in Figure 4.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2

Mean and AQ TpT total neuron, neuron density, volume, and neuropil space values (SE) for chimpanzees with different KIAAo319rsP1 alleles

Figure 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 4.

Hemispheric differences in neuropil fraction from posterior superior temporal cortex (area Tpt) of chimpanzees genotyped for KIAA0319rsP1. Photomicrographs of Nissl-stained sections from Layer III of area Tpt in an AA genotype chimpanzee’s left (A) and right (B) hemisphere, and a TT genotype chimpanzee’s left (C) and right (D) hemisphere. After background correction, the image frames are converted to binary for measurement of neuropil fraction (E–H) where the black pixels represent cell profiles and white pixels represent the neuropil space. Results from the sample are displayed as box and whisker plots of the distribution of neuropil fraction values between hemispheres (I) and the AQ (J) according to KIAA0319 rsP1 genotype.

Discussion

Exploration of polymorphic variation in KIAA0319 revealed a relatively variable coding sequence in chimpanzees. Across all four sub-species included in this study, a total of 29 SNVs were found spread across 12 of the 20 exons of the gene. Of these, a majority were nonsynonymous, thus causing amino acid changes, indicating low structural stability of the receptor protein in chimpanzees. Only a small proportion of SNVs were present in the flanking region (N = 4). This is in line with previous research showing that the most pronounced conservation across species in KIAA0319 extends from the transcription start site to ∼1 kb upstream (Dennis et al., 2009). In humans, several SNVs in the upstream region of the gene have been shown to have strong associations with reading disorders and dyslexia (Cope et al., 2005; Harold et al., 2006; Dennis et al., 2009; Elbert et al., 2011) and similarly, in our study, the strongest association with brain phenotypic differences was found for variants KIAA0319rsP1 and KIAA0319rsP4, despite a lack of overlap between human and chimpanzee promoter region SNVs. It thus appears for our chimpanzee population, that differential gene expression patterns are a likely driving factor behind this phenotypic variation, but further studies using gene expression assays are required to confirm this conclusion.

Findings from the SBM analysis showed that two SNVs in the promotor region of the KIAA0319 gene (KIAA0319rsP1 and KIAA0319rsP4), were associated with differences in gray matter volume of several brain regions. As hypothesized, these polymorphisms were associated with differences in gray matter covariation of the posterior superior temporal gyrus (including area Tpt and Heschl’s gyrus, HG). This brain region is associated with a variety of cognitive functions including language comprehension and production and previous studies have reported that atypical language processing is associated with SNVs in KIAA0319 in humans (Hirayasu et al., 2000; Goulven and Tzourio-mazoyer, 2004; Dorsaint-Pierre et al., 2006; Warrier et al., 2009; Darki et al., 2012; Pinel et al., 2012; Jamadar et al., 2013; Friederici, 2015; Cardin et al., 2016; Eicher et al., 2016; Ozernov-Palchik and Gaab, 2016; Skeide et al., 2016).

The evidence that SNVs in KIAA0319 are associated with variation in gray matter within the posterior superior temporal gyrus in chimpanzees is a somewhat paradoxical finding in light of the evidence of its role in language and reading, aptitudes that are arguably uniquely human. In fact, Dumas et al. (2021) recently reported that KIAA0319 is under strong positive selection in humans compared with primate ancestors, and that this gene (and other communication-related genes) only diverged within the hominin lineage. At the most parsimonious level, the findings reported here suggest that although SNVs in KIAA0319 are directly implicated in the morphology of the posterior superior temporal gyrus, their link to the mapping of linguistic functions onto these brain regions is less direct. In other words, SNVs in KIAA0319 may be associated with both Tpt and HG morphology and specific kinds of language impairments, but the association is not causal, but rather mediating of other factors related to experience. Alternatively, the results reported here may indicate that there are more common neuropsychological processes that underlie individual variation in auditory-visual learning in human and nonhuman primates that are similarly influenced by SNV variation in KIAA0319 in both taxa. For instance, studies on statistical learning have shown that human and nonhuman primates are sensitive to temporal regularities in auditory and visual signals, which some have argued is the foundation for speech as well as syntactical processing (Hauser et al., 2001; Newport et al., 2004; Petkov and Jarvis, 2012; Fagot, 2017; Heimbauer et al., 2018). In great apes, several studies have reported impressive human speech comprehension abilities, including the processing of sentences presented in English only (Savage-Rumbaugh et al., 1993; Sevcik and Savage-Rumbaugh, 1994; Brakke and Savage-Rumbaugh, 1995). Finally, neuroimaging and lesion studies have shown that area Tpt, HG, and a number of other regions are involved in processing of species-specific vocalizations (Heffner and Heffner, 1984; Poremba et al., 2003, 2004; Gil-da-Costa et al., 2006; Petkov et al., 2008; Taglialatela et al., 2009). Based on these collective findings, it is intriguing to speculate that SNVs in KIAA0319 in nonhuman primates may underlie individual variation in auditory-visual learning and associated brain regions, although this hypothesis awaits additional research.

In addition, our microstructure analysis showed that KIAA0319rsP1 variants are associated with hemispheric differences in neuropil fraction of chimpanzees. This suggests that KIAA0319 expression may be involved in regulation of processes related to the formation and maintenance of synapses, dendrites, or axons in the microstructure of chimpanzee brains within a region directly involved in communication. Studies in rodents have shown that KIAA0319 plays a role in neural migration during formation of the cerebral neocortex, the development of dendritic arbors and spines, axon outgrowth, and has functional impacts on auditory processing (Peschansky et al., 2010; Platt et al., 2013; Centanni et al., 2014; Franquinho et al., 2017; Guidi et al., 2017). However, there are limited data examining KIAA0319 expression in the brains of humans or other primates (Kato et al., 2014; Muntané et al., 2017). It should be noted that our findings are based on a relatively small sample size, as is common for postmortem histologic studies. Nevertheless, in combination with the SBM results, these microstructure data further support the conclusion that KIAA0319 influences neuroanatomy in a manner that is likely to be functionally significant. Future studies are needed to address whether the hemispheric differences in neuropil fraction are because of variation in synapses, dendritic morphology, or axon distributions.

Footnotes

  • The authors declare no competing financial interests.

  • This research was supported in part by National Institutes of Health Grants NS-092988, NS-73134, and HD-60563 and National Science Foundation INSPIRE Grant 1542848. The National Center for Chimpanzee Care (NCCC) chimpanzees are supported by the NIH NCRR Cooperative Agreement U42-OD011197. The NCCC is fully accredited by AAALAC International.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium provided that the original work is properly attributed.

References

  1. ↵
    Alexander-Bloch A, Giedd JN, Bullmore E (2013) Imaging structural co-variance between human brain regions. Nat Rev Neurosci 14:322–336. doi:10.1038/nrn3465 pmid:23531697
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    Andersson JL, Jenkinson M, Smith S (2007) Non-linear registration aka spatial normalization. FMRIB technical report TR07JA2. Oxford: FMRIB Analysis Group of the University of Oxford.
  3. ↵
    Bard KA, Hopkins WD (2018) Early socioemotional intervention mediates long-term effects of atypical rearing on structural covariation in gray matter in adult chimpanzees. Psychol Sci 29:594–603. doi:10.1177/0956797617740685 pmid:29381427
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    Bogart SL, Bennett AJ, Schapiro SJ, Reamer LA, Hopkins WD (2014) Different early rearing experiences have long‐term effects on cortical organization in captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Dev Sci 17:161–174. doi:10.1111/desc.12106 pmid:24206013
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    Boyes RG, Gunter JL, Frost C, Janke AL, Yeatman T, Hill DLG, Bernstein MA, Thompson PM, Weiner MW, Schuff N, Alexander GE, Killiany RJ, DeCarli C, Jack CR, Fox NC (2008) Intensity non-uniformity correction using N3 on 3-T scanners with multichannel phased array coils. Neuroimage 39:1752–1762. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.10.026
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    Brakke KE, Savage-Rumbaugh ES (1995) The development of language skills in bonobo and chimpanzee. I. Comprehension. Lang Commun 15:121–148. doi:10.1016/0271-5309(95)00001-7
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  7. ↵
    Cardin V, Smittenaar RC, Orfanidou E, Rönnberg J, Capek CM, Rudner M, Woll B (2016) Differential activity in Heschl’s gyrus between deaf and hearing individuals is due to auditory deprivation rather than language modality. Neuroimage 124:96–106. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.08.073 pmid:26348556
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    Centanni TM, Booker AB, Sloan AM, Chen F, Maher BJ, Carraway RS, Khodaparast N, Rennaker R, LoTurco JJ, Kilgard MP (2014) Knockdown of the dyslexia-associated gene Kiaa0319 impairs temporal responses to speech stimuli in rat primary auditory cortex. Cereb Cortex 24:1753–1766. doi:10.1093/cercor/bht028 pmid:23395846
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    Cope N, Harold D, Hill G, Moskvina V, Stevenson J, Holmans P, Owen MJ, O’Donovan MC, Williams J (2005) Strong evidence that KIAA0319 on chromosome 6p Is a susceptibility gene for developmental dyslexia. Am J Hum Genet 76:581–591. doi:10.1086/429131
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    Coupe P, Yger P, Prima S, Hellier P, Kervrann C, Barillot C (2008) An optimized blockwise nonlocal means denoising filter for 3-D magnetic resonance images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 27:425–441. doi:10.1109/TMI.2007.906087 pmid:18390341
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    Darki F, Peyrard M, Matsson H, Kere J, Klingberg T (2012) Three dyslexia susceptibility genes, DYX1C1, DCDC2, and KIAA0319, affect temporo-parietal white matter structure. Biol Psychiatry 72:671–676. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2012.05.008 pmid:22683091
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    de Manuel M, Kuhlwilm M, Frandsen P, Sousa VC, Desai T, Prado-Martinez J, Hernandez-Rodriguez J, Dupanloup I, Lao O, Hallast P, Schmidt JM, Heredia-Genestar JM, Benazzo A, Barbujani G, Peter BM, Kuderna LFK, Casals F, Angedakin S, Arandjelovic M, Boesch C, et al. (2016) Chimpanzee genomic diversity reveals ancient admixture with bonobos. Science 354:477–481. doi:10.1126/science.aag2602 pmid:27789843
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    Dennis MY, Paracchini S, Scerri TS, Prokunina-Olsson L, Knight JC, Wade-Martins R, Coggil P, Beck S, Green ED, Monaco AP (2009) A common variant associated with dyslexia reduces expression of the KIAA0319 gene. PLoS Genet 5:e1000436. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000436 pmid:19325871
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    Dorsaint-Pierre R, Penhune VB, Watkins KE, Neelin P, Lerch JP, Bouffard M, Zatorre RJ (2006) Asymmetries of the planum temporale and Heschl’s gyrus: relationship to language lateralization. Brain 129:1164–1176. doi:10.1093/brain/awl055 pmid:16537567
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    Douaud G, Smith S, Jenkinson M, Behrens T, Johansen-Berg H, Vickers J, James S, Voets N, Watkins K, Matthews PM, James A (2007) Anatomically related grey and white matter abnormalities in adolescent-onset schizophrenia. Brain 130:2375–2386. doi:10.1093/brain/awm184 pmid:17698497
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    Dumas G, Malesys S, Bourgeron T (2021) Systematic detection of brain protein-coding genes under positive selection during primate evolution and their roles in cognition. Genome Res 31:484–496. doi:10.1101/gr.262113.120 pmid:33441416
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    Eckert MA, Berninger VW, Vaden KI Jr., Gebregziabher M, Tsu L (2016) Gray matter features of reading disability: a combined meta-analytic and direct analysis approach(1,2,3,4). eNeuro 3:ENEURO.0103-15.2015. doi:10.1523/ENEURO.0103-15.2015
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    Eicher JD, Montgomery AM, Akshoomoff N, Amaral DG, Bloss CS, Libiger O, Schork NJ, Darst BF, Casey BJ, Chang L, Ernst T, Frazier J, Kaufmann WE, Keating B, Kenet T, Kennedy D, Mostofsky S, Murray SS, Sowell ER, Bartsch H, et al. (2016) Dyslexia and language impairment associated genetic markers influence cortical thickness and white matter in typically developing children. Brain Imaging Behav 10:272–282. doi:10.1007/s11682-015-9392-6 pmid:25953057
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    Elbert A, Lovett MW, Cate-Carter T, Pitch A, Kerr EN, Barr CL (2011) Genetic variation in the KIAA0319 5′ region as a possible contributor to dyslexia. Behav Genet 41:77–89. doi:10.1007/s10519-010-9434-1 pmid:21207242
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    Ely JJ, Dye B, Frels WI, Fritz J, Gagneux P, Khun HH, Switzer WM, Lee DR (2005) Subspecies composition and founder contribution of the captive US chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) population. Am J Primatol 67:223–241. doi:10.1002/ajp.20179 pmid:16229023
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    Enard W, Przeworski M, Fisher SE, Lai CSL, Wiebe V, Kitano T, Monaco AP, Pääbo S (2002) Molecular evolution of FOXP2, a gene involved in speech and language. Nature 418:869–872. doi:10.1038/nature01025 pmid:12192408
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    Fagot J (2017) Orthographic processing in animals: implications for comparative psychologists. Learn Behav 45:209–210. doi:10.3758/s13420-017-0267-0 pmid:28378304
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Finet J, Fillion-Robin JC, Pujol S, Bauer C, Jennings D, Fennessy F, Sonka M, Buatti J, Aylward S, Miller JV, Pieper S, Kikinis R (2012) 3D slicer as an image computing platform for the quantitative imaging network. Magn Reson Imaging 30:1323–1341. doi:10.1016/j.mri.2012.05.001 pmid:22770690
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    Fisher SE, Marcus GF (2006) The eloquent ape: genes, brains and the evolution of language. Nat Rev Genet 7:9–20. doi:10.1038/nrg1747 pmid:16369568
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    Fisher SE, Scharff C (2009) FOXP2 as a molecular window into speech and language. Trends Genet 25:166–177. doi:10.1016/j.tig.2009.03.002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    Franquinho F, Nogueira-Rodrigues J, Duarte JM, Esteves SS, Carter-Su C, Monaco AP, Molnár Z, Velayos-Baeza A, Brites P, Sousa MM (2017) The dyslexia-susceptibility protein KIAA0319 inhibits axon growth through Smad2 signaling. Cereb Cortex 27:1732–1747. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhx023 pmid:28334068
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    Friederici AD (2015) White-matter pathways for speech and language processing. Handb Clin Neurol 129:177–186. doi:10.1016/B978-0-444-62630-1.00010-X pmid:25726269
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    Gil-da-Costa R, Martin A, Lopes MA, Muñoz M, Fritz JB, Braun AR (2006) Species-specific calls activate homologs of Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas in the macaque. Nat Neurosci 9:1064–1070. doi:10.1038/nn1741 pmid:16862150
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    Goulven J, Tzourio-mazoyer N (2004) Hemispheric specialization for language. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 44:1–12. doi:10.1016/j.brainresrev.2003.10.001 pmid:14739000
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    Guidi LG, Mattley J, Martinez-Garay I, Monaco AP, Linden JF, Velayos-Baeza A, Molnár Z (2017) Knockout mice for dyslexia susceptibility gene homologs KIAA0319 and KIAA0319L have unaffected neuronal migration but display abnormal auditory processing. Cereb Cortex 27:5831–5845. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhx269 pmid:29045729
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    Harold D, Paracchini S, Scerri T, Dennis M, Cope N, Hill G, Moskvina V, Walter J, Richardson AJ, Owen MJ, Stein JF, Green ED, O’Donovan MC, Williams J, Monaco AP (2006) Further evidence that the KIAA0319 gene confers susceptibility to developmental dyslexia. Mol Psychiatry 11:1085–1091. doi:10.1038/sj.mp.4001904 pmid:17033633
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    Hauser MD, Newport EL, Aslin RN (2001) Segmentation of the speech stream in a non-human primate: statistical learning in cotton-top tamarins. Cognition 78:B53–B64. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00132-3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    Hecht M, Bromberg Y, Rost B (2015) Better prediction of functional effects for sequence variants. BMC genomics 16:S1. doi:10.1186/1471-2164-16-S8-S1
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    Heffner HE, Heffner RS (1984) Temporal lobe lesions and perception of species-specific vocalizations by macaques. Science 226:75–76. doi:10.1126/science.6474192 pmid:6474192
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. ↵
    Heimbauer LA, Conway CM, Christiansen MH, Beran MJ, Owren MJ (2018) Visual artificial grammar learning by rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta): exploring the role of grammar complexity and sequence length. Anim Cogn 21:267–284. doi:10.1007/s10071-018-1164-4 pmid:29435770
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. ↵
    Hirayasu Y, McCarley RW, Salisbury DF, Tanaka S, Kwon JS, Frumin M, Snyderman D, Yurgelun-Todd DA, Kikinis R, Jolesz FA, Shenton ME (2000) Planum temporale and Heschl gyrus volume reduction in schizophrenia. Arch Gen Psychiatry 57:692–699. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.57.7.692 pmid:10891040
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    Hopkins WD, Nir T (2010) Planum temporale surface area and grey matter asymmetries in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): the effect of handedness and comparison with findings in humans. Behav Brain Res 208:436–443. doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2009.12.012 pmid:20035802
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. ↵
    Hopkins WD, Avants BB (2013) Regional and hemispheric variation in cortical thickness in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Neurosci 33:5241–5248. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2996-12.2013 pmid:23516289
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. ↵
    Hopkins WD, Latzman RD, Mareno MC, Schapiro SJ, Gómez-Robles A, Sherwood CC (2019) Heritability of gray matter structural covariation and tool use skills in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): a source-based morphometry and quantitative genetic analysis. Cereb Cortex 29:3702–3711. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhy250
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    Jacobs RL, Baden AL, Spriggs A, MacFie TS, Irwin MT, Wright PC, Louis EE Jr., Lawler RR, Mundy NI, Bradley BJ (2016) Primate genotyping via high resolution melt analysis: rapid and reliable identification of color vision status in wild lemurs. Primates 57:541–547. doi:10.1007/s10329-016-0546-y pmid:27271303
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    Jamadar S, Powers NR, Meda SA, Calhoun VD, Gelernter J, Gruen JR, Pearlson GD (2013) Genetic influences of resting state fMRI activity in language-related brain regions in healthy controls and schizophrenia patients: a pilot study. Brain Imaging Behav 7:15–27. doi:10.1007/s11682-012-9168-1 pmid:22669497
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    Jenkinson M, Smith S (2001) A global optimisation method for robust affine registration of brain images. Med Image Anal 5:143–156. doi:10.1016/s1361-8415(01)00036-6 pmid:11516708
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. ↵
    Jenkinson M, Bannister P, Brady M, Smith S (2002) Improved optimization for the robust and accurate linear registration and motion correction of brain images. Neuroimage 17:825–841. doi:10.1016/s1053-8119(02)91132-8 pmid:12377157
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. ↵
    Jenkinson M, Pechaud M, Smith S (2005) BET2: MR-based estimation of brain, skull and scalp surfaces. Eleventh annual meeting of the organization for human brain mapping, 17:167. Toronto, Canada.
    OpenUrl
  45. ↵
    Kato M, Okanoya K, Koike T, Sasaki E, Okano H, Watanabe S, Iriki A (2014) Human speech- and reading-related genes display partially overlapping expression patterns in the marmoset brain. Brain Lang 133:26–38. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2014.03.007 pmid:24769279
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. ↵
    Kikinis R, Pieper SD, Vosburgh KG (2014) 3D slicer: a platform for subject-specific image analysis, visualization, and clinical support. In: Intraoperative imaging and image-guided therapy, pp 277–289. Berlin: Springer Science and Business Media.
  47. ↵
    Lai CSL, Fisher SE, Hurst JA, Vargha-Khadem F, Monaco AP (2001) A forkhead-domain gene is mutated in a severe speech and language disorder. Nature 413:519–523. doi:10.1038/35097076 pmid:11586359
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. ↵
    Luciano M, Evans DM, Hansell NK, Medland SE, Montgomery GW, Martin NG, Wright MJ, Bates TC (2013) A genome-wide association study for reading and language abilities in two population cohorts. Genes Brain Behav 12:645–652. doi:10.1111/gbb.12053 pmid:23738518
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. ↵
    Lyn HL, Pierre P, Bennett AJ, Fears SC, Woods RP, Hopkins WD (2011) Planum temporale grey matter asymmetries in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), vervet (Chlorocebus aethiops sabaeus), rhesus (Macaca mulatta) and bonnet (Macaca radiata) monkeys. Neuropsychologia 49:2004–2012. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.03.030 pmid:21447349
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  50. ↵
    Marie D, Roth M, Lacoste R, Nazarian B, Bertello A, Anton JL, Hopkins WD, Margiotoudi K, Love SA, Meguerditchian A (2018) Left brain asymmetry of the planum temporale in a nonhominid primate: redefining the origin of brain specialization for language. Cereb Cortex 28:1808–1815. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhx096 pmid:28431000
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  51. ↵
    Mascheretti S, De Luca A, Trezzi V, Peruzzo D, Nordio A, Marino C, Arrigoni F (2017) Neurogenetics of developmental dyslexia: from genes to behavior through brain neuroimaging and cognitive and sensorial mechanisms. Transl Psychiatry 7:e987. doi:10.1038/tp.2016.240 pmid:28045463
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  52. ↵
    Mulholland MM, Navabpour SV, Mareno MC, Schapiro SJ, Young LJ, Hopkins WD (2020) AVPR1A variation is linked to gray matter covariation in the social brain network of chimpanzees. Genes Brain Behav 19:e12631. doi:10.1111/gbb.12631 pmid:31894656
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. ↵
    Muntané G, Santpere G, Verendeev A, Seeley WW, Jacobs B, Hopkins WD, Navarro A, Sherwood CC (2017) Interhemispheric gene expression differences in the cerebral cortex of humans and macaque monkeys. Brain Struct Funct 222:3241–3254. doi:10.1007/s00429-017-1401-7 pmid:28317062
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. ↵
    Neal Webb SJ, Hau J, Schapiro SJ (2018) Captive chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) behavior as a function of space per animal and enclosure type. Am J Primatol 80:e22749. doi:10.1002/ajp.22749 pmid:29575053
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  55. ↵
    Newport EL, Hauser MD, Spaepen G, Aslin RN (2004) Learning at a distance II. Statistical learning of non-adjacent dependencies in a non-human primate. Cogn Psychol 49:85–117. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2003.12.002 pmid:15304368
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  56. ↵
    Ozernov-Palchik O, Gaab N (2016) Tackling the ‘dyslexia paradox’: reading brain and beahvior for early markers of developmental dyslexia. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci 7:156–176.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  57. ↵
    Peschansky VJ, Burbridge TJ, Volz AJ, Fiondella C, Wissner-Gross Z, Galaburda AM, Lo Turco JJ, Rosen GD (2010) The effect of variation in expression of the candidate dyslexia susceptibility gene homolog Kiaa0319 on neuronal migration and dendritic morphology in the rat. Cereb Cortex 20:884–897. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp154 pmid:19679544
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  58. ↵
    Petkov CI, Jarvis ED (2012) Birds, primates, and spoken language origins: behavioral phenotypes and neurobiological substrates. Front Evol Neurosci 4:12. doi:10.3389/fnevo.2012.00012 pmid:22912615
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. ↵
    Petkov CI, Kayser C, Steudel T, Whittingstall K, Augath M, Logothetis NK (2008) A voice region in the monkey brain. Nat Neurosci 11:367–374. doi:10.1038/nn2043 pmid:18264095
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  60. ↵
    Pfenning AR, Hara E, Whitney O, Rivas MV, Wang R, Roulhac PL, Howard JT, Wirthlin M, Lovell PV, Ganapathy G, Mouncastle J, Moseley MA, Thompson JW, Soderblom EJ, Iriki A, Kato M, Gilbert MTP, Zhang G, Bakken T, Bongaarts A, et al. (2014) Convergent transcriptional specializations in the brains of humans and song-learning birds. Science 346:1256846. doi:10.1126/science.1256846 pmid:25504733
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  61. ↵
    Pinel P, Fauchereau F, Moreno A, Barbot A, Lathrop M, Zelenika D, Le Bihan D, Poline J-B, Bourgeron T, Dehaene S (2012) Genetic variants of FOXP2 and KIAA0319/TTRAP/THEM2 locus are associated with altered brain activation in distinct language-related regions. J Neurosci 32:817–825. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5996-10.2012 pmid:22262880
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  62. ↵
    Platt MP, Adler WT, Mehlhorn AJ, Johnson GC, Wright KA, Choi RT, Tsang WH, Poon MW, Yeung SY, Waye MM, Galaburda AM, Rosen GD (2013) Embryonic disruption of the candidate dyslexia susceptibility gene homolog Kiaa0319-like results in neuronal migration disorders. Neuroscience 248:585–593. doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2013.06.056 pmid:23831424
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  63. ↵
    Poremba A, Saunders RC, Crane AM, Cook M, Sokoloff L, Mishkin M (2003) Functional mapping of the primate auditory system. Science 299:568–572. doi:10.1126/science.1078900 pmid:12543977
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  64. ↵
    Poremba A, Malloy M, Saunders RC, Carson RE, Herscovitch P, Mishkin M (2004) Species-specific calls evoke asymmetric activity in the monkey’s temporal poles. Nature 427:448–451. doi:10.1038/nature02268 pmid:14749833
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  65. ↵
    Prado-Martinez J, Sudmant PH, Kidd JM, Li H, Kelley JL, Lorente-Galdos B, Veeramah KR, Woerner AE, O’Connor TD, Santpere G, Cagan A, Theunert C, Casals F, Laayouni H, Munch K, Hobolth A, Halager AE, Malig M, Hernandez-Rodriguez J, Hernando-Herraez I, et al. (2013) Great ape genetic diversity and population history. Nature 499:471–475. doi:10.1038/nature12228 pmid:23823723
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  66. ↵
    Preuss TM (2012) Human brain evolution: from gene discovery to phenotype discovery. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109 [Suppl 1]:10709–10716. doi:10.1073/pnas.1201894109 pmid:22723367
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  67. ↵
    Savage-Rumbaugh ES, Murphy J, Sevcik RA, Brakke KE, Williams SL, Rumbaugh DM (1993) Language comprehension in ape and child. Monogr Soc Res Child Dev 58:1–256. pmid:8366872
    OpenUrlPubMed
  68. ↵
    Scerri TS, Morris AP, Buckingham LL, Newbury DF, Miller LL, Monaco AP, Bishop DVM, Paracchini S (2011) DCDC2, KIAA0319 and CMIP are associated with reading-related traits. Biol Psychiatry 70:237–245. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.02.005 pmid:21457949
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  69. ↵
    Sevcik RA, Savage-Rumbaugh ES (1994) Language comprehension and use by great apes. Lang Commun 14:37–58. doi:10.1016/0271-5309(94)90019-1
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  70. ↵
    Skeide MA, Brauer J, Friederici AD (2016) Brain functional and structural predictors of language performance. Cereb Cortex 26:2127–2139. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhv042 pmid:25770126
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  71. ↵
    Smith B, Lu CP, Alvarado Bremer J (2010) High‐resolution melting analysis (HRMA): a highly sensitive inexpensive genotyping alternative for population studies. Mol Ecol Resour 10:193–196. doi:10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02726.x pmid:21565009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  72. ↵
    Smith SM (2002) Fast robust automated brain extraction. Hum Brain Mapp 17:143–155. doi:10.1002/hbm.10062 pmid:12391568
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  73. ↵
    Smith SM, Jenkinson M, Woolrich MW, Beckmann CF, Behrens TEJ, Johansen-Berg H, Bannister PR, De Luca M, Drobnjak I, Flitney DE, Niazy RK, Saunders J, Vickers J, Zhang Y, De Stefano N, Brady JM, Matthews PM (2004) Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL. Neuroimage 23:S208–S219. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.051
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  74. ↵
    Spocter MA, Hopkins WD, Garrison AR, Bauernfeind AL, Stimpson CD, Hof PR, Sherwood CC (2010) Wernicke’s area homolog in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): probabilistic mapping, asymmetry and comparison with humans. Proc Biol Sci 277:2165–2174. doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.0011 pmid:20236975
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  75. ↵
    Spocter MA, Hopkins WD, Barks SK, Bianchi S, Hehmeyer AE, Anderson SM, Stimpson CD, Fobbs AJ, Hof PR, Sherwood CC (2012) Neuropil distribution in the cerebral cortex differs between humans and chimpanzees. J Comp Neurol 520:2917–2929. doi:10.1002/cne.23074 pmid:22350926
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  76. ↵
    Sun Y, Gao Y, Zhou Y, Chen H, Wang G, Xu J, Xia J, Huen MS, Siok WT, Jiang Y, Tan LH (2014) Association study of developmental dyslexia candidate genes DCDC2 and KIAA0319 in Chinese population. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet 165B:627–634. doi:10.1002/ajmg.b.32267 pmid:25230923
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  77. ↵
    Taglialatela JP, Russell JL, Schaeffer JA, Hopkins WD (2009) Visualizing vocal perception in the chimpanzee brain. Cereb Cortex 19:1151–1157. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhn157 pmid:18787228
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  78. ↵
    Tustison N, Gee J (2009) N4ITK: Nick’s N3 ITK implementation for MRI bias field correction. Insight J 9:1–8.
    OpenUrl
  79. ↵
    Tustison NJ, Avants BB, Cook PA, Zheng Y, Egan A, Yushkevich PA, Gee JC (2010) N4ITK: improved N3 bias correction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 29:1310–1320. doi:10.1109/TMI.2010.2046908 pmid:20378467
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  80. ↵
    Tustison NJ, Cook PA, Klein A, Song G, Das SR, Duda JT, Kandel BM, van Strien N, Stone JR, Gee JC, Avants BB (2014) Large-scale evaluation of ANTs and FreeSurfer cortical thickness measurements. Neuroimage 99:166–179. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.05.044 pmid:24879923
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  81. ↵
    Vargha-Khadem F, Gadian DG, Copp A, Mishkin M (2005) FOXP2 and the neuroanatomy of speech and language. Nat Rev Neurosci 6:131–138. doi:10.1038/nrn1605 pmid:15685218
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  82. ↵
    Vickery S, Hopkins WD, Sherwood CC, Schapiro SJ, Latzman RD, Caspers S, Gaser C, Eickhoff SB, Dahnke R, Hoffstaedter F (2020) Chimpanzee brain morphometry utilizing standardized MRI preprocessing and macroanatomical annotations. Elife 9:e60136. doi:10.7554/eLife.60136
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  83. ↵
    Warrier C, Wong P, Penhune V, Zatorre R, Parrish T, Abrams D, Kraus N (2009) Relating structure to function: Heschl’s gyrus and acoustic processing. J Neurosci 29:61–69. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3489-08.2009 pmid:19129385
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  84. ↵
    Xu L, Groth KM, Pearlson G, Schretlen DJ, Calhoun VD (2009) Source-based morphometry: the use of independent component analysis to identify gray matter differences with application to schizophrenia. Hum Brain Mapp 30:711–724. doi:10.1002/hbm.20540 pmid:18266214
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  85. ↵
    Zhu Y, Liu F, Zou X, Torbey M (2015) Comparison of unbiased estimation of neuronal number in the rat hippocampus with different staining methods. J Neurosci Methods 254:73–79. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2015.07.022
    OpenUrlCrossRef

Synthesis

Reviewing Editor: Christine Portfors, Washington State University

Decisions are customarily a result of the Reviewing Editor and the peer reviewers coming together and discussing their recommendations until a consensus is reached. When revisions are invited, a fact-based synthesis statement explaining their decision and outlining what is needed to prepare a revision will be listed below. The following reviewer(s) agreed to reveal their identity: NONE. Note: If this manuscript was transferred from JNeurosci and a decision was made to accept the manuscript without peer review, a brief statement to this effect will instead be what is listed below.

The reviewers agree that this is an interesting study with novel results. The manuscript would benefit from a more clear rationale and less use of abbreviations. A number of other concerns as noted below are necessary to improve the manuscript.

Summary of reviews:

Major concerns:

-One of the main findings of this paper, as outlined in the abstract, is the differences in brain microstructure measured using histology. At present this data is only summarized in a table. Some of the features presented can be abstract for a reader so it is critical that some images of the histology are shown. A suitable figure to add would include images of neuropil asymmetries (or lack thereof) for AA, AT, and TT alleles for rsP1.

-How were number of neurons calculated using just a Nissl stain? Cresyl violet also stains non-neuronal cells in the brain. A NeuN antibody, for example, would be more suitable for neuron-specific counts.

-The duplicate presentation of 3D renderings can be misleading. Combining figures 1 and 2, which includes (A) 3D renderings, (B) SBM scores for rsP1, and (C) SBM scores for rsP4 would facilitate a clearer presentation of the findings.

-It is unclear why 3D renderings of only component 1, 2, and 7 were shown. The methods say there were 8 components identified. More clarity is needed for why these were chosen or more discussion on the other 5 components.

-line 100: unclear, did this study generate new T1 data (as the methods would suggest) or used existing data as this sentence would imply. Needs clarification and citation for where the data came from, if applicable.

-line 248: it is unclear if new histology was generated for this study or if only used previously published (Spocter et al.) data, or both. As with the imaging data, this needs clarification.

-3D renderings of SBM components: At present, these images are not interpretable to someone not familiar with the organization of the non-human primate brain. eNeuro is a broad neuroscience journal and thus has diverse readership. It would help potential readers to include labels or a schematic for regions of interest.

Minor concerns:

-line 61: cite Pfenning et al., 2014 Science as it significantly contributed to knowledge of genes with hypothesized involvement in human speech

-line 131: how was the promoter region defined?

-line 132: why was the human genome used as a reference (both for mapping chimpanzee genomes and KIAA0319 reference) when chimpanzee has an annotated high quality reference genome? Mapping to the human genome assumes that the gene model is the same between the two species and may ignore species differences.

-line 272: please provide details on general linear models used

-line 332: rephrase, makes it seem like there’s only 12 exons in this gene (e.g. 29 SNVs found in 12 of the 20 exons of the gene)

-Discussion: Dumas et al., 2021 Genome Research recently found that KIAA0319 exhibits strong positive selection in humans. The discussion lines 357-366 make some hypotheses about the role of this gene in non-human primates, yet gene divergence may explain primate differences. Incorporating this new study into this discussion would be interesting.

-Figure legends: The figure legends are very brief which does not help with the interpretability of the figures. A figure legend typically begins with a one sentence title that summarizes what is being presented. The rest of the legend should include sufficient detail to interpret the figure in the absence of reading the results section. Composite figures like presented here should include letters to denote parts (e.g. Figure 1A, Figure 1B). Further detail will help readers navigate this manuscript.

Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 8 (6)
eNeuro
Vol. 8, Issue 6
November/December 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this eNeuro article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Gray Matter Variation in the Posterior Superior Temporal Gyrus Is Associated with Polymorphisms in the KIAA0319 Gene in Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from eNeuro
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in eNeuro.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Gray Matter Variation in the Posterior Superior Temporal Gyrus Is Associated with Polymorphisms in the KIAA0319 Gene in Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)
William D. Hopkins, Nicky Staes, Michele M. Mulholland, Steven J. Schapiro, Madeleine Rosenstein, Cheryl Stimpson, Brenda J. Bradley, Chet C. Sherwood
eNeuro 23 November 2021, 8 (6) ENEURO.0169-21.2021; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0169-21.2021

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Gray Matter Variation in the Posterior Superior Temporal Gyrus Is Associated with Polymorphisms in the KIAA0319 Gene in Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)
William D. Hopkins, Nicky Staes, Michele M. Mulholland, Steven J. Schapiro, Madeleine Rosenstein, Cheryl Stimpson, Brenda J. Bradley, Chet C. Sherwood
eNeuro 23 November 2021, 8 (6) ENEURO.0169-21.2021; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0169-21.2021
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Significance Statement
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
    • Synthesis
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • chimpanzees
  • communication
  • gray matter
  • KIAA0319
  • language
  • neuropil fraction

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Research Article: New Research

  • Characterization of the Tau Interactome in Human Brain Reveals Isoform-Dependent Interaction with 14-3-3 Family Proteins
  • The Mobility of Neurofilaments in Mature Myelinated Axons of Adult Mice
  • A Conserved Role for Stomatin Domain Genes in Olfactory Behavior
Show more Research Article: New Research

Cognition and Behavior

  • Environment Enrichment Facilitates Long-Term Memory Consolidation Through Behavioral Tagging
  • Effects of cortical FoxP1 knockdowns on learned song preference in female zebra finches
  • The genetic architectures of functional and structural connectivity properties within cerebral resting-state networks
Show more Cognition and Behavior

Subjects

  • Cognition and Behavior

  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Issue Archive
  • Blog
  • Browse by Topic

Information

  • For Authors
  • For the Media

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2023 by the Society for Neuroscience.
eNeuro eISSN: 2373-2822

The ideas and opinions expressed in eNeuro do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the eNeuro Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in eNeuro should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in eNeuro.