Limits...
The effects of puberty on white matter development in boys.

Menzies L, Goddings AL, Whitaker KJ, Blakemore SJ, Viner RM - Dev Cogn Neurosci (2014)

Bottom Line: Most studies have focused on age-related effects, whilst puberty-related changes are not well understood.In addition, testosterone was correlated with MD in these pubertally significant regions.In conclusion, pubertal status was significantly related to MD, but not FA, and this relationship cannot be explained by changes in chronological age alone.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: University College London Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, Alexandra House, 17 Queen Square, London WC1N 3AR, UK; General Adolescent and Paediatric Unit, University College London Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London WC1N 1EH, UK. Electronic address: lacmenzies@gmail.com.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

The Interaction model of how Mean Diffusivity (MD) within the single significant cluster shown in Fig. 1 changes with age and pubertal stage. The interaction model (age + puberty + age × puberty) was shown to fit the data best. Boys in early puberty (Tanner stage ≤ 3) are indicated in blue and do not show the expected decrease in mean diffusivity as age increases, in contrast boys who have progressed into late puberty (Tanner stage ≥ 4), shown in red, undergo a reduction in mean diffusivity as age increases. Lines show model fit, markers depict individual participants’ data. (B) Mean values together with bars representing standard error are shown for mean diffusivity in the significant cluster associated with puberty for the early puberty and late puberty groups.
© Copyright Policy - CC BY
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4352899&req=5

fig0010: The Interaction model of how Mean Diffusivity (MD) within the single significant cluster shown in Fig. 1 changes with age and pubertal stage. The interaction model (age + puberty + age × puberty) was shown to fit the data best. Boys in early puberty (Tanner stage ≤ 3) are indicated in blue and do not show the expected decrease in mean diffusivity as age increases, in contrast boys who have progressed into late puberty (Tanner stage ≥ 4), shown in red, undergo a reduction in mean diffusivity as age increases. Lines show model fit, markers depict individual participants’ data. (B) Mean values together with bars representing standard error are shown for mean diffusivity in the significant cluster associated with puberty for the early puberty and late puberty groups.

Mentions: Despite the relatively narrow age range in our sample, there remained a significant age difference between our early puberty and late puberty groups (Table 1). Therefore, we used regression models to assess whether the whole brain voxelwise pubertal effects described above could simply be due to age differences. We compared three models: a puberty only model, an age only model and an interaction model (puberty + age + age × puberty) and found that the model of best fit was the interaction model, indicating that information regarding both measures could best explain MD across the two groups (Table 3). After the interaction model, the puberty only model was the next best fit, followed by the age only model, which was the poorest fit (Table 3). In order to illustrate the best fitting interaction model, this model is plotted graphically alongside the raw and group mean MD data in Fig. 2.


The effects of puberty on white matter development in boys.

Menzies L, Goddings AL, Whitaker KJ, Blakemore SJ, Viner RM - Dev Cogn Neurosci (2014)

The Interaction model of how Mean Diffusivity (MD) within the single significant cluster shown in Fig. 1 changes with age and pubertal stage. The interaction model (age + puberty + age × puberty) was shown to fit the data best. Boys in early puberty (Tanner stage ≤ 3) are indicated in blue and do not show the expected decrease in mean diffusivity as age increases, in contrast boys who have progressed into late puberty (Tanner stage ≥ 4), shown in red, undergo a reduction in mean diffusivity as age increases. Lines show model fit, markers depict individual participants’ data. (B) Mean values together with bars representing standard error are shown for mean diffusivity in the significant cluster associated with puberty for the early puberty and late puberty groups.
© Copyright Policy - CC BY
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4352899&req=5

fig0010: The Interaction model of how Mean Diffusivity (MD) within the single significant cluster shown in Fig. 1 changes with age and pubertal stage. The interaction model (age + puberty + age × puberty) was shown to fit the data best. Boys in early puberty (Tanner stage ≤ 3) are indicated in blue and do not show the expected decrease in mean diffusivity as age increases, in contrast boys who have progressed into late puberty (Tanner stage ≥ 4), shown in red, undergo a reduction in mean diffusivity as age increases. Lines show model fit, markers depict individual participants’ data. (B) Mean values together with bars representing standard error are shown for mean diffusivity in the significant cluster associated with puberty for the early puberty and late puberty groups.
Mentions: Despite the relatively narrow age range in our sample, there remained a significant age difference between our early puberty and late puberty groups (Table 1). Therefore, we used regression models to assess whether the whole brain voxelwise pubertal effects described above could simply be due to age differences. We compared three models: a puberty only model, an age only model and an interaction model (puberty + age + age × puberty) and found that the model of best fit was the interaction model, indicating that information regarding both measures could best explain MD across the two groups (Table 3). After the interaction model, the puberty only model was the next best fit, followed by the age only model, which was the poorest fit (Table 3). In order to illustrate the best fitting interaction model, this model is plotted graphically alongside the raw and group mean MD data in Fig. 2.

Bottom Line: Most studies have focused on age-related effects, whilst puberty-related changes are not well understood.In addition, testosterone was correlated with MD in these pubertally significant regions.In conclusion, pubertal status was significantly related to MD, but not FA, and this relationship cannot be explained by changes in chronological age alone.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: University College London Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, Alexandra House, 17 Queen Square, London WC1N 3AR, UK; General Adolescent and Paediatric Unit, University College London Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London WC1N 1EH, UK. Electronic address: lacmenzies@gmail.com.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus