AUTHOR=Peng Shin-Lei , Chen Chun-Ming , Huang Chen-You , Shih Cheng-Ting , Huang Chiun-Wei , Chiu Shao-Chieh , Shen Wu-Chung 

TITLE=Effects of Hemodynamic Response Function Selection on Rat fMRI Statistical Analyses

JOURNAL=Frontiers in Neuroscience

VOLUME=13

YEAR=2019

URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2019.00400

DOI=10.3389/fnins.2019.00400

ISSN=1662-453X

ABSTRACT=<p>The selection of the appropriate hemodynamic response function (HRF) for signal modeling in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is important. Although the use of the boxcar-shaped hemodynamic response function (BHRF) and canonical hemodynamic response (CHRF) has gained increasing popularity in rodent fMRI studies, whether the selected HRF affects the results of rodent fMRI has not been fully elucidated. Here we investigated the signal change and <italic>t</italic>-statistic sensitivities of BHRF, CHRF, and impulse response function (IRF). The effect of HRF selection on different tasks was analyzed by using data collected from two groups of rats receiving either 3 mA whisker pad or 3 mA forepaw electrical stimulations (<italic>n</italic> = 10 for each group). Under whisker pad stimulation with large blood-oxygen-level dependent (BOLD) signal change (4.31 ± 0.42%), BHRF significantly underestimated signal changes (<italic>P</italic> &lt; 0.001) and <italic>t</italic>-statistics (<italic>P</italic> &lt; 0.001) compared with CHRF or IRF. CHRF and IRF did not provide significantly different <italic>t</italic>-statistics (<italic>P</italic> &gt; 0.05). Under forepaw stimulation with small BOLD signal change (1.71 ± 0.34%), different HRFs provided insignificantly different <italic>t</italic>-statistics (<italic>P</italic> &gt; 0.05). Therefore, the selected HRF can influence data analysis in rodent fMRI experiments with large BOLD responses but not in those with small BOLD responses.</p>