Dopamine signaling modulates the stability and integration of intrinsic brain networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dopaminergic projections are hypothesized to stabilize neural signaling and neural representations, but how they shape regional information processing and large-scale network interactions remains unclear. Here we investigated effects of lowered dopamine levels on within-region temporal signal variability (measured by sample entropy) and between-region functional connectivity (measured by pairwise temporal correlations) in the healthy brain at rest. The acute phenylalanine and tyrosine depletion (APTD) method was used to decrease dopamine synthesis in 51 healthy participants who underwent resting-state functional MRI (fMRI) scanning. Functional connectivity and regional signal variability were estimated for each participant. Multivariate partial least squares (PLS) analysis was used to statistically assess changes in signal variability following APTD as compared to the balanced control treatment. The analysis captured a pattern of increased regional signal variability following dopamine depletion. Changes in hemodynamic signal variability were concomitant with changes in functional connectivity, such that nodes with greatest increase in signal variability following dopamine depletion also experienced greatest decrease in functional connectivity. Our results suggest that dopamine may act to stabilize neural signaling, particularly in networks related to motor function and orienting attention towards behaviorally-relevant stimuli. Moreover, dopaminedependent signal variability is critically associated with functional embedding of individual areas in large-scale networks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".