<p>As someone who has recently started learning about how we study the brain, the two most common forms of data I've encountered are neuroimaging data (fMRI scans, etc.) of the brain's distribution of activity in response to various external conditions, and a lesser extent gene expression, the degree to which genes are expressed in certain areas of the brain such as those responsible for serotonin transport. While I have encountered very detailed gene expression datasets such as the Allen Institute's heatmaps of the human brain, the vast majority of experimental research I've looked at seems to rely on neuroimaging data rather than RNA-Seq for obtaining its data.</p>
<p>Websites such as <a href="http://www.psychencode.org/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">PsychENCODE</a>, for instance, display data that seems to indicate genomic analysis can be used to trace the expression of genotypes in the brain to observed phenotypes associated with disorders such as ASD, for instance, yet for the vast majority of disorders like OCD or Tourette's Syndrome I'm primarily directed to research involving the use of neuroimaging data.</p>
<p>Suppose we identify genes strongly correlated with a particular disorder via a genome-wide association study that doesn't take into consideration the regions where said genes are expressed. What are the differences in the types of information obtained searching for where those genes are most strongly expressed in the brain vs. analyzing where the most significant degree of live activity occurs when searching for neurological bases of that disorder in the brain?</p>
<p>One distinction I had considered was the potential for predictive models created from mapping gene expression in the brain: for example, if a gene marker was found that correlated with hyperactive processing in regions it was expressed in, could mapping the areas in a sensory cortex where such processing occurs help create a predictive model for what behaviors sensory processing disorders may cause in an individual? And would a similar method be possible using neuroimaging data?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-06-30T14:52:44.360Z
It seems to me like you're asking for a comparison of apples and oranges. I wouldn't really know where to start, because it's not clear where you're coming from or what problem you're trying to solve. For example, are you aware that neuroimaging can be performed in living humans, whereas getting a spatial map of gene expression involves putting a brain in a blender? (except for some techniques involving PET, but not RNA seq)
Bryan Krause
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-06-30T15:26:53.907Z
I wasn't thinking of using gene expression as a diagnostic tool, but rather for research: the fact that one requires a postmortem analysis definitely rules out the former but I don't think it rules out the latter. I'm trying to understand what information the distribution of gene expression in the brain provides, and whether there's any overlap with that obtained from neuroimaging.
Lambda
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-06-30T15:51:23.530Z
The distribution of gene expression tells you where proteins are expressed. Functional neuroimaging tells you about energy metabolism at a specific point in time. They're measuring completely different things. Obtaining post mortem brains is not trivial, and of course death impacts gene expression, too.
Bryan Krause
<cognitive-neuroscience><abnormal-psychology><neuroimaging>
Neuroimaging vs. Gene Expression for Neurological Disorders
Lambda
# Neuroimaging vs. Gene Expression for Neurological Disorders

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-06-25)

As someone who has recently started learning about how we study the brain, the two most common forms of data I've encountered are neuroimaging data (fMRI scans, etc.) of the brain's distribution of activity in response to various external conditions, and a lesser extent gene expression, the degree to which genes are expressed in certain areas of the brain such as those responsible for serotonin transport. While I have encountered very detailed gene expression datasets such as the Allen Institute's heatmaps of the human brain, the vast majority of experimental research I've looked at seems to rely on neuroimaging data rather than RNA-Seq for obtaining its data.

Websites such as [PsychENCODE](http://www.psychencode.org/), for instance, display data that seems to indicate genomic analysis can be used to trace the expression of genotypes in the brain to observed phenotypes associated with disorders such as ASD, for instance, yet for the vast majority of disorders like OCD or Tourette's Syndrome I'm primarily directed to research involving the use of neuroimaging data.

Suppose we identify genes strongly correlated with a particular disorder via a genome-wide association study that doesn't take into consideration the regions where said genes are expressed. What are the differences in the types of information obtained searching for where those genes are most strongly expressed in the brain vs. analyzing where the most significant degree of live activity occurs when searching for neurological bases of that disorder in the brain?

One distinction I had considered was the potential for predictive models created from mapping gene expression in the brain: for example, if a gene marker was found that correlated with hyperactive processing in regions it was expressed in, could mapping the areas in a sensory cortex where such processing occurs help create a predictive model for what behaviors sensory processing disorders may cause in an individual? And would a similar method be possible using neuroimaging data?

**Tags:** cognitive-neuroscience, abnormal-psychology, neuroimaging

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: It seems to me like you're asking for a comparison of apples and oranges. I wouldn't really know where to start, because it's not clear where you're coming from or what problem you're trying to solve. For example, are you aware that neuroimaging can be performed in living humans, whereas getting a spatial map of gene expression involves putting a brain in a blender? (except for some techniques involving PET, but not RNA seq)  
> **username_0**: I wasn't thinking of using gene expression as a diagnostic tool, but rather for research: the fact that one requires a postmortem analysis definitely rules out the former but I don't think it rules out the latter. I'm trying to understand what information the distribution of gene expression in the brain provides, and whether there's any overlap with that obtained from neuroimaging.  
> **username_1**: The distribution of gene expression tells you where proteins are expressed. Functional neuroimaging tells you about energy metabolism at a specific point in time. They're measuring completely different things. Obtaining post mortem brains is not trivial, and of course death impacts gene expression, too.  

---

## 0 answers

