Whole-brain functional connectivity during emotional word classification in medication-free Major Depressive Disorder: abnormal salience circuitry and relations to positive emotionality

Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) has been associated with biased processing and abnormal regulation of negative and positive information, which may result from compromised coordinated activity of prefrontal and subcortical brain regions involved in evaluating emotional information. We tested whether patients with MDD show distributed changes in functional connectivity with a set of independently derived brain networks that have shown high correspondence with different task demands, including stimulus salience and emotional processing. We further explored if connectivity during emotional word processing related to the tendency to engage in positive or negative emotional states. In this study, 25 medication-free MDD patients without current or past comorbidity and matched controls (n=25) performed an emotional word-evaluation task during functional MRI. Using a dual regression approach, individual spatial connectivity maps representing each subject’s connectivity with each standard network were used to evaluate between-group differences and effects of positive and negative emotionality (extraversion and neuroticism, respectively, as measured with the NEO-FFI). Results showed decreased functional connectivity of the medial prefrontal cortex, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, and ventral striatum with the fronto-opercular salience network in MDD patients compared to controls. In patients, abnormal connectivity was related to extraversion, but not neuroticism. These results confirm the hypothesis of a relative (para)limbic-cortical decoupling that may explain dysregulated affect in MDD. As connectivity of these regions with the salience network was related to extraversion, but not to general depression severity or negative emotionality, dysfunction of this network may be responsible for the failure to sustain engagement in rewarding behavior.

Metabolic theory predicts whole-ecosystem properties

Understanding the effects of individual organisms on material cycles and energy fluxes within ecosystems is central to predicting the impacts of human-caused changes on climate, land use, and biodiversity. Here we present a theory that integrates metabolic (organism-based bottom-up) and systems (ecosystem-based top-down) approaches to characterize how the metabolism of individuals affects the flows and stores of materials and energy in ecosystems. The theory predicts how the average residence time of carbon molecules, total system throughflow (TST), and amount of recycling vary with the body size and temperature of the organisms and with trophic organization. We evaluate the theory by comparing theoretical predictions with outputs of numerical models designed to simulate diverse ecosystem types and with empirical data for real ecosystems. Although residence times within different ecosystems vary by orders of magnitude—from weeks in warm pelagic oceans with minute phytoplankton producers to centuries in cold forests with large tree producers—as predicted, all ecosystems fall along a single line: residence time increases linearly with slope = 1.0 with the ratio of whole-ecosystem biomass to primary productivity (B/P). TST was affected predominantly by primary productivity and recycling by the transfer of energy from microbial decomposers to animal consumers. The theory provides a robust basis for estimating the flux and storage of energy, carbon, and other materials in terrestrial, marine, and freshwater ecosystems and for quantifying the roles of different kinds of organisms and environments at scales from local ecosystems to the biosphere.

Effects of forage source and extruded linseed supplementation on methane emissions from growing dairy cattle of differing body weights

Changes in diet carbohydrate amount and type (i.e., starch vs. fiber) and dietary oil supplements can affect ruminant methane emissions. Our objectives were to measure methane emissions, whole-tract digestibility, and energy and nitrogen utilization from growing dairy cattle at 2 body weight (BW) ranges, fed diets containing either high maize silage (MS) or high grass silage (GS), without or with supplemental oil from extruded linseed (ELS). Four Holstein-Friesian heifers aged 13 mo (BW range from start to finish of 382 to 526 kg) were used in experiment 1, whereas 4 lighter heifers aged 12 mo (BW range from start to finish of 292 to 419 kg) were used in experiment 2. Diets were fed as total mixed rations with forage dry matter (DM) containing high MS or high GS and concentrates in proportions (forage:concentrate, DM basis) of either 75:25 (experiment 1) or 60:40 (experiment 2), respectively. Diets were supplemented without or with ELS (Lintec[AU1: Add manufacturer name and location.]; 260 g of oil/ kg of DM) at 6% of ration DM. Each experiment was a 4 × 4 Latin square design with 33-d periods, with measurements during d 29 to 33 while animals were housed in respiration chambers. Heifers fed MS at a heavier BW (experiment 1) emitted 20% less methane per unit of DM intake (yield) compared with GS (21.4 vs. 26.6, respectively). However, when repeated with heifers of a lower BW (experiment 2), methane yield did not differ between the 2 diets (26.6 g/kg of DM intake). Differences in heifer BW had no overall effect on methane emissions, except when expressed as grams per kilogram of digestible organic matter (OMD) intake (32.4 vs. 36.6, heavy vs. light heifers). Heavier heifers fed MS in experiment 1 had a greater DM intake (9.4 kg/d) and lower OMD (755 g/kg), but no difference in N utilization (31% of N intake) compared with heifers fed GS (7.9 kg/d and 799 g/kg, respectively). Tissue energy retention was nearly double for heifers fed MS compared with GS in experiment 1 (15 vs. 8% of energy intake, respectively). Heifers fed MS in experiment 2 had similar DM intake (7.2 kg/d) and retention of energy (5% of intake energy) and N (28% of N intake), compared with GS-fed heifers, but OMD was lower (741 vs. 765 g/kg, respectively). No effect of ELS was noted on any of the variables measured, irrespective of animal BW, and this was likely due to the relatively low amount of supplemental oil provided. Differences in heifer BW did not markedly influence dietary effects on methane emissions. Differences in methane yield were attributable to differences in dietary starch and fiber composition associated with forage type and source.