## Revisiting double diffusion encoding MRS in the mouse brain at 11.7T: which microstructural features are we sensitive to?

Mélissa Vincent  1,2 , Marco Palombo  3 , Julien Valette 1,2,*

1 Commissariat à  l'Energie  Atomique  et  aux  Energies  Alternatives  (CEA),  MIRCen,  F-92260, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France

- 2 Neurodegenerative  Diseases  Laboratory,  UMR9199,  CEA,  CNRS,  Université  Paris  Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, F-92260, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France
- 3 Department of Computer Science and Centre for Medical Image Computing, University College of London, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom

*Corresponding author : Dr. Julien Valette, Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives  (CEA),  Direction  de  la  Recherche  Fondamentale  (DRF),  Institut  de  Biologie François  Jacob,  MIRCen,  18  Route  du  Panorama,  92260  Fontenay-aux-Roses,  France;  Phone: +33 1 46 54 81 30; e-mail: julien.valette@cea.fr

## Abstract

Brain metabolites, such as N-acetylaspartate or myo-inositol, are constantly probing their local cellular  environment  under  the  effect  of  diffusion.  Diffusion-weighted  NMR  spectroscopy therefore  presents  unparalleled  potential  to  yield  cell-type  specific  microstructural  information. Double  diffusion  encoding  (DDE)  relies  on  two  diffusion  blocks  which  relative  directions describe a varying angle during the course of the experiment. Unlike single diffusion encoding, DDE measurements at long mixing time display some angular modulation of the signal amplitude which reflects  compartment shape anisotropy, while requiring relatively  low  gradient  strength. This angular dependence has been formerly used to quantify cell fiber diameter using a model of isotropically  oriented  infinite  cylinders.  However,  it  has  been  little  explored  how  additional features of the cell microstructure, such as cell body diameter, fiber length and branching may also  influence  the  DDE  signal.  Here,  we  used  a  cryoprobe  as  well  as  state-of-the-art  postprocessing to perform DDE acquisitions with high accuracy and precision in the mouse brain at 11.7  T.  We  then  compared  our  results  to  simulated  DDE  datasets  obtained  in  various  3D  cell models  in  order  to  pinpoint  which  features  of  cell  morphology  may  influence  the  most  the angular  dependence  of  the  DDE  signal.  While  the  infinite  cylinder  model  poorly  fits  our experimental data, we show that incorporating branched fiber structure in our model is paramount to sensibly interpret the DDE signal. Lastly, experiments and simulations in the short mixing time regime suggest that some sensitivity to cell body diameter might be retrieved, although additional experiments would be required to further support this statement.

## 1. Introduction

Elucidating brain cells' structural complexity is a formidable task that has been driving decades of intense methodological development in the field of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) in vivo . Magnetic  resonance  imaging  (MRI)  is  based  on  the  detection  of  the  abundant  pool  of  water molecules residing in biological tissues and offers a variety of contrast sources such as diffusion MRI,  which  has  led  to  invaluable  insights  into  brain  microstructure  (Alexander  et  al.,  2019; Novikov  et  al.,  2019).  Improvement  in  scanner  hardware  has  allowed  the  implementation  of magnetic  resonance  spectroscopy  (MRS)  at  very  high  field in  vivo ,  yielding  highly-resolved spectra  for  the  accurate  quantification  of  brain  metabolites  (Tkac  et  al.,  2009).  MRS  therefore opens up a direct and specific access to brain biochemistry to non-invasively assess and monitor pathologies  affecting  the  central  nervous  system  (CNS)  (Gill  et  al.,  1989).  It  is  furthermore possible  to  be  sensitive  to  metabolite  diffusion,  e.g.  using  a  pair  of  diffusion  gradients  as proposed by Stejskal-Tanner (Stejskal and Tanner, 1965). This is of particular interest because intracellular  metabolites  are  constantly  exploring  their  local  environment    under  the  effect  of diffusion,  thus  potentially  reporting  precious  information  on  several  attributes  of  the  cell microstructure such as cell fiber length or diameter (Palombo et al., 2018c).  Moreover, unlike water, some metabolites are known to be confined in specific cell compartments, as in the case of NAA  and  glutamate  (Glu),  which  are  neuronal  markers,  or  myo-inositol  (Ins)  and  choline compounds (tCho), which are associated to glial cells (Choi et al., 2007). This enables probing of the microstructure of specific cell types, which might be highly relevant in a neuropathological context where severe morphological alterations of specific cells can occur, for instance neuronal atrophy or neuroinflammation (Ercan et al., 2016).

Different diffusion-weighted MRS (DW-MRS) approaches have been proposed to quantify cell microstructure,  such  as  high-b  value  experiments  (mainly  to  probe  fiber  diameter  but  also presumably yielding some sensitivity to cell body diameter (Ligneul et al., 2019; Palombo et al., 2017; Palombo M, 2019; Palombo et al., 2018a, b)), or measurements of the apparent diffusion coefficient  (ADC)  up  to  very  long  diffusion  times  (td)  to  probe  long-range  cell  structure (potentially  enabling  quantification  of  cell  fiber  branching  and  length(Ligneul  et  al.,  2019; Palombo et al., 2016)). Such approaches were recently used to quantitatively estimate alterations of astrocytic morphology in a mouse model of reactive astrocytes, where the diffusion of Ins was significantly  different  compared  to  the  control  group,  while  the  diffusion  of  other  metabolites remained unchanged (Ligneul et al., 2019). In that work, modeling of Ins data resulted in higher values for fiber diameter and length in the case of activated astrocytes, which was confirmed by quantitative  morphological  analysis  of  astrocytes  using  confocal  microscopy ex  vivo , thus demonstrating  the  potential  of  the  technique  for  microstructure  quantification.  Unfortunately, going to very long diffusion times or high b-values leads to low signal-to-noise ratio, and high bvalue requires very high gradient strength, making the implementation of such measurements on clinical scanners highly challenging.

One approach circumventing these issues is double diffusion encoding (DDE) (Shemesh et al., 2010). In DDE, two diffusion blocks are successively applied while the relative directions of the corresponding diffusion-sensitizing gradients are varied by an angle φ during the course of the experiment.  Unlike  the  more  conventional  Single  Diffusion  Encoding  (SDE),  DDE  has  been shown to display sensitivity to compartment shape anisotropy (CSA) together with microscopic anisotropy (µA) that arises from the presence of restricting boundaries (Mitra, 1995; Ozarslan, 2009;  Ozarslan  and  Basser,  2008).  Theoretical  analysis  of  DDE  was  proposed  by  Mitra  who examined two regimes based on null/short vs. long mixing time (TM) between the two diffusion blocks  (Mitra,  1995).  The  long  TM  case  is  particularly  interesting  to  disentangle  between compartments  without  CSA  (e.g.  spheres,  or  a  tortuous  medium  with  typical  pore  size  much below  the  diffusion  distance)  and  with  CSA  (e.g.  ellipsoidal  pores  or  fibers).  Indeed,  Mitra demonstrated that there is an angular dependence of the NMR signal magnitude for ellipsoidal pores but not for spherical ones. In this regime, in the case of ellipsoidal pores, a signal maximum is  consequently  expected  in  the  parallel/antiparallel  cases  (φ=0  and  180°)  whereas  a  signal minimum is predicted for the perpendicular case (φ=90 and 270°).

DDE-MRS was successfully pioneered by Shemesh et al. to non-invasively follow microstructural alterations of ischemic tissues in a stroke model (Shemesh et al., 2014). Signal modulation as a function of φ unambiguously demonstrated that metabolite diffusion compartments  exhibited  CSA.  Moreover,  the  authors  reported  a  dramatic  increase  of  the amplitude of the NMR signal angular dependence 24 hour after the onset of ischemia for NAA, tCho  and  total  creatine  (tCr)  suggesting  that  CSA  is  increasing.  Shemesh et al. further investigated  the  potential  of  DDE-MRS  to  quantitatively  extract  cell  fiber  diameter  dfiber  from

DDE  signal  modulation,  which  allowed  distinguishing  neuronal  and  astrocytic  compartments (Shemesh et al., 2017): estimated cell-fiber diameter was smaller for NAA (dfiber=0.04 µm) than for Ins (dfiber=3.1 µm), which was well in line with d values inferred from high-b measurements in the study by Palombo et al (Palombo et al., 2017).

In this study, we revisit the works of Shemesh et al with two main methodological differences: i) conventional radio frequency (RF) pulses are used (instead of polychromatic RF pulses targeting a few resonances of interest) to detect more metabolites, and ii) state-of-the-art post-processing pipeline  is  applied  for  accurate  diffusion-weighted  signal  quantification,  similarly  to  all  our previous  works  on  DW-MRS,  including  scan-to-scan  phase  correction,  LCModel  analysis  and macromolecule signal quantification. In the end, signal modulation can be reliably quantified for six  metabolites.  Analysis  of  the  experimental  data  with  a  model  of  isotropically  oriented cylinders  of  infinite  length,  similarly  as  in  (Shemesh  et  al.,  2017),  strongly  suggests  that  this model does not satisfactorily account for our data. We propose that additional structural features are required to better describe DDE-MRS data.

## 2. Methods

## 2.1. DW-MRS experiments

All experimental protocols were reviewed and approved by the local ethics committee (CETEA N°44) and submitted to the French Ministry of Education and Research (approval: APAFIS#7952015060914444077  v1).  They  were  performed  in  a  facility  authorized  by  local  authorities (authorization #B92-032-02), in strict accordance with recommendations of the European Union (2010-63/EEC).  All  efforts  were  made  to  minimize  animal  suffering  and  animal  care  was supervised by veterinarians and animal technicians. Mice were housed under standard environmental  conditions  (12-hour  light-dark  cycle,  temperature:  22±1°C  and  humidity:  50%) with ad libitum access to food and water.

Four  C57BL/6J wild type mice were anesthetized with 1.5% isoflurane  in  air/O2  mixture  and scanned on an 11.7 T scanner (Bruker, Ettlingen, Germany) with maximal gradient strength on each  axis  Gmax=752  mT/m,  using  a  cryoprobe.  DDE-MRS  was  performed  in  a  63  µL  voxel positioned  around  the  hippocampus,  using  a  sequence  comprising  a  double  spin-echo  module with two diffusion blocks followed by a LASER localization module (TE\_SE/TE\_LASER=119/25 ms, Δ/δ/TM=30/4.5/29.5 ms) similarly to (Shemesh et al., 2014). A total diffusion-weighting of 20 ms/µm² was applied, i.e. b=10 ms/µm² per diffusion block. Water signal was suppressed using a VAPOR module. MM acquisition was performed using a double inversion recovery (TI1/TI2=2200/730 ms) and a diffusion weighting of b=10 ms/µm² on each block.

The  first  pair  of  diffusion  gradients  was  applied  along  X  whilst  gradient  orientation  for  the second diffusion block was incremented from φ=0 to φ=360° in the XY plane by 45° steps (φ being defined following the convention proposed by Shemesh et al (Shemesh et al., 2016)). For each  φ  value,  a  total  of  128  repetitions  (split  in  four  blocks  of  32  repetitions  interleaved  with other φ values) were acquired.

Signal post-processing was performed as described in (Ligneul et al., 2017), including individual scan phasing and inclusion of an experimental macromolecule (MM) spectrum in the LCModel basis set (sum of two experimentally measured spectra). Signal attenuation reported in this paper corresponds to the ratio S(φ,b=20 ms/µm²)/S(b=0.02 ms/µm²).

## 2.2. DDE data modeling

Experimental data for each animal and each metabolite was first fitted to the phenomenological equation A+B×cos(2φ) as in (Shemesh et al., 2014) using a Monte Carlo approach. The residual sum of squares corresponding to the best initial fit was used as standard deviation to randomly induce artificial Gaussian noise in our experimental data before repeating the fitting operation. This  process  was  performed  10000  times.  The  resulting  A  and  B  coefficients  therefore correspond to the mean values obtained over the generated dataset. The ratio ! " was then used to quantify  the  amplitude  of  the  signal  angular  modulation  with  respect  to  the  global  MR  signal attenuation.

Furthermore,  simulations  based  on  analytical  computation  of  DDE-MRS  signals  in  infinite, isotropically oriented cylinders were performed using the MISST toolbox  (Drobnjak et al., 2010; Drobnjak et al., 2011; Ianus et al., 2013) for Dfree ranging from 0.1 to 0.5 µm²/ms and dfiber from 0.1  up  to  5  µm,  and  compared  to  experimental  data  to  estimate  the  parameter  values  that  best explain  the  data,  as  performed  by  Shemesh  et  al.  (Shemesh  et  al.,  2017).  Calculation  of  least square  residuals  was  used  as  the  fitting  cost  function.  Errors  on  estimated  parameters  were calculated using a Monte Carlo procedure, as described above.

## 3. Results

## 3.1. DDE signal modulation for brain metabolites

Figure  1A shows  a  series  of  DDE-MRS  spectra  acquired  in  one  mouse  whereas Figure  1B shows LCModel spectral decomposition for φ=0 in this experiment. Signal attenuation could be reliably  quantified  for  NAA,  tCr,  Ins,  tCho  and  taurine  (Tau)  with  Cramer-Rao  lower  bounds &lt;2% for all  φ  values.  Lactate  resonance  was  also  quantified,  however  CRLB  values  of  ~10% were  obtained. Figure  2 displays  the  signal  angular  dependence  at  TM=29.5  ms  for  six metabolites  as  well  as  for  MM.  In  this  figure,  the  experimental  data  points  are  fitted  to  the function  A+B*cos(2φ)  appearing  in  light  grey.  The  very  low  standard  deviations  that  were achieved for all experiments can be appreciated. These results are coherent with Özarslan's work that confirmed Mitra's findings and proposed a Taylor expansion of the MR signal attenuation up to  the  fourth-order  term,  showing  that  the  angular  dependence  of  the  diffusion  signal  in  finite cylinders can be characterized by the function A+B*cos(2φ) whose coefficients can be related to L and d (Ozarslan, 2009).

Coefficients A and B are reported in the top part of Table 1 .  It  can  be seen that the amplitude modulation  of  the  DDE-MRS  signal  -  reflected  here  by  B  -  is  larger  for  NAA  (neuronal metabolite) than for non-specific (tCr and Tau) or glial markers (tCho and Ins), which might at first glance be intuitively interpreted as neurons exhibiting narrower fibers, i.e. larger CSA than glia (Palombo et al., 2017; Shemesh et al., 2017), although this simple picture will be challenged later  in  the  following  sections.  Interestingly,  lactate  exhibits  stronger  signal  attenuation,  which could be explained by the intrinsically fast diffusion of lactate (which is a small metabolite), but also by the contribution of a significant extracellular lactate pool with a rather faster, "free-like" diffusion (Pfeuffer et al., 2000). In line with this idea, lactate exhibits less pronounced angular amplitude modulation than intracellular metabolites, consistent with the idea that, unlike within cellular  fibers,  in  the  extracellular  space  correlation  between  subsequent  diffusion  directions  is rapidly lost. Lastly, it can be observed that MM signal is little attenuated and does not display any angular  dependence,  which  is  consistent  with  the  fact  that  MM  signal  results  from  a  pool  of slowing diffusing molecules. The normalized modulation ! " is also reported for each metabolite in Table 1, and will be used later for comparison with simulations.

## 3.2. Estimating fiber diameter: simulations in infinite cylinders using MISST

Heatmaps based on least square residuals for each metabolite as compared to DDE simulations performed with MISST, as a function of Dfree and dfiber, are presented in Figure 3 .  They show similar aspect for all metabolites except lactate. Diameters and Dfree values corresponding to the best fits for each metabolite are reported in the bottom part of Table 1 . Values for dfiber are in the 3-5 µm range, while Dfree is found to be ~0.2 µm²/ms. These values are not in good agreement with previously published values. DW-MRS works performed at high b or short td rather reported diameters  below  3  µm  (Kroenke  et  al.,  2004;  Ligneul  et  al.,  2017;  Marchadour  et  al.,  2012; Palombo et al., 2017) which better agrees with histological estimates for axons and dendrites as well as for astrocytic processes (Ligneul et al., 2019). While it is more difficult to compare Dfree to  ground  truth  value,  past  DW-MRS  works  consistently  estimated  Dfree  to  be  larger  than  0.3 µm²/ms (and up to ~0.6 µm²/ms for certain works) (Kroenke et al., 2004; Ligneul et al., 2017; Marchadour et al., 2012; Palombo et al., 2016; Palombo et al., 2017; Ronen et al., 2013).

These  unexpected  results  led  us  to  further  investigate  the  effect  of  d  on  the  amplitude  of  the signal angular dependence. We therefore carefully examined MISST simulations, in particular for Dfree ranging from 0.3 to 0.45 µm²/ms and dfiber from 0.5 to 2 µm and subsequently fitted each of the basis signals to 𝐴 + 𝐵 × cos	(2𝜑) , as performed for the metabolites. Figure 4 displays the A, B and ! " for each combination of dfiber/Dfree values, revealing that no variation of the ratio values was  obtained  when  varying  dfiber  whereas  Dfree  seemed  to  have  a  greater  effect  on  the  signal angular modulation, therefore illustrating the lack of sensitivity to fiber diameter for dfiber&lt;2 µm.

Quite strikingly, ! " values were much higher in the case of the simulated signals (0.26-0.42) than for the metabolites (0.101-0.212). This is well in agreement with the results displayed in Figure 5, showing the superposition of NAA and Ins experimental data to a simulated signal obtained from a model of 1-µm diameter infinite cylinders (Dfree=0.35 µm²/ms). Hence, a striking result is that the signal angular dependence of our experimental data (quantified by the ratio ! " ) is much less  pronounced  than  expected  from  analytical  simulations  using  realistic  parameter  values,  as least when considering diffusion in randomly oriented infinite cylinders.

## 4. Discussion

## 4.1. Limited sensitivity to cell fiber diameter

Heatmaps of the cost function presented in Figure 3 exhibit  a  global  minimum  for  unrealistic dfiber and Dfree values for all metabolites. In their former study, Shemesh et al were able to infer realistic dfiber and Dfree values, but we were unable to reproduce those results. It should be noted that,  although  similar  diffusion  parameters  (Δ/δ/TM/b)  were  used  in  both  studies,  there  were some notable methodological differences. Shemesh et al. performed acquisitions at ultrahigh field (21.1  T)  combined with the use of judiciously designed radiofrequency selective pulses which eliminated  the  need  for  water  suppression  module  and  simplified  spectra,  so  that  signal  was quantified by peak integration. Here we worked at lower field strength, but still benefited from exquisite sensitivity thanks to a cryoprobe. We used broadband radiofrequency pulses exciting the whole ppm range to detect more metabolites, and we minimized potential bias in metabolite signal quantification by performing scan-to-scan phase correction, accounting for the contribution of MM signal and using LCModel. As a result, standard deviations achieved in the present study are very low, which might help better identify discrepancies between data and models.

The results shown in Figure 4 strongly suggest that DDE-MRS offers limited sensitivity to cell fiber diameter, despite the use of a relatively high b-value of 20 ms/µm².  Improved sensitivity to dfiber may  be  achievable  by  optimizing  the  gradient  waveform,  as  proposed  by  Drobnjak et  al. who were able to distinguish smaller axon radii below 5 µm when using gradients of increasing frequency  (Drobnjak  et  al.,  2010).  Shemesh  later  on  investigated  the  DDE  and  the  double oscillating  diffusion  encoding  (DODE)  schemes  in  fixed  spinal  cords  at  16.4  T.  He  showed superior sensitivity to axon diameter when performing DODE measurements, which is line with the idea that oscillating gradients can probe smaller spin displacements occurring perpendicularly to the main diffusion axis (Shemesh, 2018).

A study performed by Ianus et  al on DDE and DODE imaging implied that simple geometric models  such  as  infinite  cylinders  may  be  insufficient  when  trying  to  accurately  quantify microscopic diffusion anisotropy and the need of considering structures along the fiber axis was underlined (Ianus et al., 2018). Experimental parameters such as the b-value and sequence timing parameters,  in  particular  td  and  TM,  were  also  pointed  out  as  potential  sources  of  bias  when trying to accurately estimate the cell µA.

The  unrealistic  parameter  values  extracted  from  data  fitting,  as  well  as  the  large  discrepancy between  experimental  and  simulated  data  shown  in Figure  5, clearly  suggest  that  the  infinite cylinders model seems to fail to satisfactorily describe our experimental data when using realistic parameter values: in particular, experimentally measured amplitude modulation (and normalized amplitude)  appears  too  low.  This  suggests  that  metabolite  DDE  signature  may  contain  more complex  and  intricate  information  reflecting  various  microstructural  features  beyond  fiber diameter.

## 4.2. Which feature of cell microstructure could the DDE signal be sensitive to?

In an attempt to better understand what morphological features may explain the observed DDE signal modulation, we considered 3D cell-substrates with additional degrees of complexity. Our driving  hypothesis  is  that  the  lower  signal  amplitude  modulation  observed  in  the  experimental data is due to loss of correlation between subsequent diffusion directions that may be induced by a)  non-negligible  fraction  of  diffusing  metabolites  restricted  in  isotropic  (i.e.  spherical)  soma compartment and/or b) branching of cellular fibers, leading to hopping of diffusing metabolites from one fiber branch oriented in one direction to another branch oriented in a different direction.

To investigate the validity of these hypotheses, Monte Carlo simulations of diffusion NMR signal were  carried  out  in  realistic  brain  cell  morphologies  obtained  by  using  the  generative  model recently introduced by Palombo et al (Palombo et al., 2019). In brief, using 12 selected features like soma radius, branch radius, branch order, branching angle etc., the model generates realistic 3D  computational  models  of  any  brain  cell  in  a  controlled  and  flexible  fashion.  Then,  the diffusion of 3000 particles within 50 different instances of such realistic cell-substrates (resulting in  a  total  of  1.5x10   diffusing  particles)  was  simulated  using  Camino  (Cook  et  al.,  2006)  with 5 diffusion coefficient Dfree and time step of 20 ∝ s. From the resulting spin trajectories, the DDE

signal  was  computed  by  phase  accumulation  approach,  using  exactly  the  same  sequence parameters of the experiments (see Methods section).

In  all  simulations  described  below,  eight  fibers  of  finite  length  were  connected  to  a  central 'soma'.  Fiber  diameter  was  fixed  to  a  realistic  value  (dfiber=1  µm),  but  anyway  this  has  little impact on DDE modulation with the current acquisition parameters, as already explained earlier. The free diffusion coefficient was also set to a realistic value of Dfree=0.35 µm²/ms (Kroenke et al., 2004; Palombo et al., 2017). Starting from that, we investigated the effect of fiber structure (number of successive branches Nbranch and length of segments between embranchment Lseg, e.g. as defined in (Palombo et al., 2016) as well as soma size (dsoma) on DDE behavior. Instead of a systematic  study,  here  we  decided  to  focus  on  four  cases,  already  spanning  a  broad  range  of conditions.  To  facilitate  comparison  with  intracellular  metabolite  DDE  data,  simulation  results were also fitted with to 𝐴 + 𝐵 × cos	(2𝜑) to derive A, B and ! " (reported in the top part of Table 2 ).

The first case aimed at assessing DDE behavior for short fibers (Lseg=30 µm), without successive embranchment (Nbranch =1), and with a soma being reduced to a simple point (dsoma=0) ( Figure 6A ).  This  case  is  used  as  benchmark  for  the  simple  case  of  connected  randomly  oriented  thin fibers.  A  slight  decrease  of  B  and ! " can  be  observed  as  compared  to  unconnected  infinite cylinders as simulated with MISST, for the same fiber diameter and Dfree.

The second case aimed at evaluating if introducing some branching had a strong effect. Hence we set  Nbranch=4,  while  keeping  Lseg=30  µm  and  dsoma=0  ( Figure 6B ).  We  found  that  the  effect  is quite strong, with a large increase in A (becoming actually slightly larger than for experimental data)  while  B  keeps  decreasing,  resulting  in  a  quite  low ! " of  ~0.16,  i.e.  twice  as  low  as  the reference  case  of  unconnected  infinite  cylinders,  and  much  closer  to  experimentally  measured behavior.

We then wondered if a realistic soma, rather than a branched fiber structure, was also able to better account for DDE behavior. Hence we set dsoma =10 µm, while imposing a very simple fiber structure, so we set Nbranch=1 and Lseg=450 µm, so that fibers can be considered 'almost' infinite and simultaneously ensures that the soma occupies ~16% of the total cellular volume, which is a realistic volume fraction for both neurons and astrocytes (Chklovskii et al., 2002; Chvatal et al., 2007;  Ligneul  et  al.,  2019;  Sherwood  et  al.,  2004)  ( Figure  6C ).    A  very  strong  drop  of  A  is observed, while B is decreased as the same value as case 2. As a result ! " is very high, almost as high as for unconnected infinite cylinders. Overall this is not consistent with experimental data.

The last case we studied was the most realistic ( Figure 6D ), i.e. with the branched fiber structure of  case  2  (Nbranch=4,  Lseg=  30  µm),  and  the  realistic  soma  of  case  3  (dsoma=10  µm).  With  such parameters the soma still occupies ~16% of the total cellular volume. The resulting behavior is just slightly different from the case with dsoma=0 (case 2), and is now even closer to experimental data (differences between simulated data and values averaged over intracellular metabolites for A, B and ! " are less than ~25%).

Conversely,  we  wondered  how  DDE  signals  in  these  various  cases  would  translate  into  fiber diameter dfiber and Dfree, if 'naively' analyzed using the infinite cylinder model as initially done. These results are reported at the bottom of Table 2 .  It  clearly appears that branching results in strong underestimation of Dfree and moderate overestimation of dfiber, while the presence of soma has little effect on Dfree but results in strong overestimation of dfiber. In the end, data simulated with the full model (case 4) and fitted with the infinite cylinder model yields Dfree~0.20 µm²/ms and dfiber~3.2 µm, which is in surprisingly good agreement with values obtained for intracellular metabolites (average over intracellular metabolites: Dfree~0.20 µm²/ms and dfiber~3.8 µm).

Overall these simulations strongly suggest that a branched fiber structure is paramount to get a more sensible interpretation of our DDE-MRS data. A likely explanation for this could be that, in such structure,  and  considering  that  segment  length  is  short  enough  compared  to  the  diffusion distance  traveled  during  TM,  the  main  diffusion  direction  may  change  between  the  two successive diffusion blocks for a significant fraction of molecules, resulting in correlation loss and ultimately reduced amplitude modulation. Adding a non-zero cell diameter seems to better account for experimental data, but considering the sequence parameters used here, the main effect arises  from  the  fiber  structure.  Although  we  did  not  investigate  that  in  the  current  work,  it  is possible that fiber undulations would result in a similar effect to that of fiber branching (Brabec J., 2019; Ozarslan et al., 2018).

## 4.3. Can we glean additional information by performing measurements at short TM?

Both  our  simulation and  experimental  data at long TM  implied  that  sensitivity to the microstructure  of  cell  bodies  is  relatively  limited.  This  is  coherent  with  Mitra's  theory  that indicates  that  DDE  experiments  are  only  sensitive  to  the  µA  arising  from  the  delineations  of spherical  compartments when the null/short TM condition is met (Mitra, 1995). This was also experimentally confirmed in vivo by Koch and Finsterbusch who achieved DDE experiments on a 3T clinical scanner to assess cell size in the human brain (Koch and Finsterbusch, 2008). In this case, the expected signal angular modulation describes a bell-shaped function and the difference measured  between  the  maximum  and  minimum  signal  intensities  respectively  obtained  in  the anti-parallel  (φ=180°) and parallel cases (φ=0/360°) can be analytically related to the apparent compartment size (Finsterbusch, 2011; Mitra, 1995).

We therefore  postulated  that  some  sensitivity  to  soma  size  could  be  retrieved  when  acquiring DDE-MRS  signatures  at  shorter  TM,  and  we  performed  another  series  of  acquisitions  for TM=5.5 ms, keeping other parameters unchanged (Δ/δ=30/4.5 ms, b=10 µm²/ms on each block). In  this  case,  five  metabolites  could  be  reliably  quantified  (NAA,  tCr,  Ins,  tCho  and  Lac)  with CRLB values of 1% for NAA, tCr and tCho, 3% for Ins and 10% for Lac. Figure 7 displays the angular modulation obtained for these metabolites at TM=5.5 ms (as compared to TM=29.5 ms for reminder). At shorter TM, sinusoidal signal angular modulation could still be observed. More interestingly,  a  maximum  MR  signal  intensity  was  reached  for  φ=180°  while  slight  signal attenuation was obtained for the φ=0/360° data points. This trend was particularly remarkable for tCho but could also be observed for NAA, Ins and Lac.

This  may  indicate  an  intermediary  state  between  the  long  and  short  TM  regimes  predicted  by Mitra  and  we  thus  hypothesized  that  the  ratio /01234 /014 could  possibly  reflect  an  increasing sensitivity to cell bodies when shortening TM. This ratio is reported for the five metabolites at both TM in Table 3, consistently reporting higher values in the case of TM=5.5 ms as compared to TM=29.5 ms. These results shall however be interpreted cautiously, as we were able to report a statistically significant difference in the case of tCho only, according to a Kruskal-Wallis test. We further  investigated  this  intuition  by  performing  simulations  at  TM=5.5  ms  in  the  four  models presented  in Figure  7. This  enabled  us  to  compare  the  evolution  of  the /01234 /014 ratio  when shortening TM for different features of the cell morphology. Results are presented in Table 3 and revealed that the highest increase in the /01234 /014 ratio was obtained when incorporating a spherical compartment  in  our  model.  In  contrast,  branching  and  small  fiber  lengths  seemed  to  have  a negligible effect on this ratio. These findings therefore support the hypothesis that sensitivity to cell body diameter is maximized and might be experimentally accessible at shorter TM.

## 5. Conclusion

DDE measurements of brain metabolites offer an unprecedented and specific access to the CSA of neural and glial cells while requiring relatively low diffusion-weighting. The measured signal carries complex information encompassing several aspects of the cell microstructure such as fiber lengths,  branching  and  soma  size,  at  least  in  the  rodent  brain,  which  mainly  consists  in  grey matter. Mathematical models based on simple geometries for which an analytical solution can be derived,  such  as  the  infinite  cylinder  model,  appear  insufficient  to  fully  describe  experimental data.  Our  work  strongly  suggests  that  an  accurate  and  reliable  interpretation  of  DDE-MRS signature may instead necessitate simulations in complex, realistic 3D cell-substrates. Consequently, a heavy fitting pipeline may be needed to analyze experimental data, for instance involving a dictionary approach based on Monte Carlo simulations (Ligneul et al., 2019; Palombo et al., 2016;  Rensonnet  et  al., 2019). The  sensitivity to a specific feature of the cell microstructure, i.e. fiber processes or cell bodies, can be modulated by tuning the DDE sequence timing parameters such as TM. The relationship between sensitivity to a desired microstructural parameter, for instance the fiber diameter, and experimental parameters such as b-value, gradient waveform and diffusion time should be further explored.

## Acknowledgements

This  project  has  received  funding  from  the  European  Research  Council  (ERC)  under  the European Union's FP7 and Horizon 2020 research and innovation programmes (grant agreements No  336331  and  818266,  awarded  to  JV).  MP  acknowledges  support  from  EPSRC,  United Kingdom  grant  EP/N018702/1.  The  11.7  T  MRI  scanner  was  funded  by  a  grant  from 'Investissements  d'Avenir  -  ANR-11-INBS-0011  -  NeurATRIS:  A  Translational  Research Infrastructure for Biotherapies in Neurosciences".

## References

Alexander, D.C., Dyrby, T.B., Nilsson, M., Zhang, H., 2019. Imaging brain microstructure with diffusion MRI: practicality and applications. NMR Biomed 32, e3841.

Brabec J., Lasic, S., Nilsson M., 2019. Time-dependent diffusion in undulating structures: impact on axon diameter estimation arXiv preprint 1903.04536.

Chklovskii, D.B., Schikorski, T., Stevens, C.F., 2002. Wiring optimization in cortical circuits. Neuron 34, 341-347.

Choi, J.K., Dedeoglu, A., Jenkins, B.G., 2007. Application of MRS to mouse models of neurodegenerative illness. NMR Biomed 20, 216-237.

Chvatal,  A.,  Anderova,  M.,  Kirchhoff,  F.,  2007.  Three-dimensional  confocal  morphometry  -  a  new approach for studying dynamic changes in cell morphology in brain slices. J Anat 210, 671-683.

Cook  P.A.,  B.Y.,  Nedjati-Gilani  S.,  Seunarine  K.K.,  Hall  M.G.,  Paker  G.J.,  Alexander  D.C.,  2006. Camino: open-source diffusion-MRI reconstruction and processing. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med, p. 2759.

Drobnjak,  I.,  Siow,  B.,  Alexander,  D.C.,  2010.  Optimizing  gradient  waveforms  for  microstructure sensitivity in diffusion-weighted MR. J Magn Reson 206, 41-51.

Drobnjak,  I.,  Zhang,  H.,  Hall,  M.G.,  Alexander,  D.C.,  2011.  The  matrix  formalism  for  generalised gradients with time-varying orientation in diffusion NMR. J Magn Reson 210, 151-157.

Ercan,  E.,  Magro-Checa,  C.,  Valabregue,  R.,  Branzoli,  F.,  Wood,  E.T.,  Steup-Beekman,  G.M.,  Webb, A.G., Huizinga, T.W., van Buchem, M.A., Ronen, I., 2016. Glial and axonal changes in systemic lupus erythematosus measured with diffusion of intracellular metabolites. Brain 139, 1447-1457.

Finsterbusch,  J., 2011.  The  parallel-antiparallel  signal  difference  in  double-wave-vector  diffusionweighted MR at short mixing times: a phase evolution perspective. J Magn Reson 208, 114-121.

Gill,  S.S.,  Small,  R.K.,  Thomas,  D.G.T.,  Patel,  P.,  Porteous,  R.,  Van  Bruggen,  N.,  Gadian,  D.G., Kauppinen, K.A., and Williams, S.R., 1989. Brain metabolites as 1H NMR markers of neuronal and glial disorders. NMR Biomed 2, 196-200.

Ianus,  A.,  Jespersen,  S.N.,  Serradas  Duarte,  T.,  Alexander,  D.C.,  Drobnjak,  I.,  Shemesh,  N.,  2018. Accurate  estimation  of  microscopic  diffusion  anisotropy  and  its  time  dependence  in  the  mouse  brain. Neuroimage 183, 934-949.

Ianus,  A.,  Siow,  B.,  Drobnjak,  I.,  Zhang,  H.,  Alexander,  D.C.,  2013.  Gaussian  phase  distribution approximations for oscillating gradient spin echo diffusion MRI. J Magn Reson 227, 25-34.

Koch,  M.A.,  Finsterbusch,  J.,  2008.  Compartment  size  estimation  with  double  wave  vector  diffusionweighted imaging. Magn Reson Med 60, 90-101.

Kroenke, C.D., Ackerman, J.J., Yablonskiy, D.A., 2004. On the nature of the NAA diffusion attenuated MR signal in the central nervous system. Magn Reson Med 52, 1052-1059.

Ligneul, C., Palombo, M., Hernandez-Garzon, E., Carrillo-de Sauvage, M.A., Flament, J., Hantraye, P., Brouillet,  E.,  Bonvento,  G.,  Escartin,  C.,  Valette,  J.,  2019.  Diffusion-weighted  magnetic  resonance spectroscopy enables cell-specific monitoring of astrocyte reactivity in vivo. Neuroimage 191, 457-469.

Ligneul, C., Palombo, M., Valette, J., 2017. Metabolite diffusion up to very high b in the mouse brain in vivo: Revisiting the potential correlation between relaxation and diffusion properties. Magn Reson Med 77, 1390-1398.

| Marchadour, C., Brouillet, E., Hantraye, P., Lebon, V., Valette, J., 2012. Anomalous diffusion of brain metabolites evidenced by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance spectroscopy in vivo. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 32, 2153-2160.                                                     |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Mitra, P.P., 1995. Multiple wave-vector extensions of the NMR pulsed-field-gradient spin-echo diffusion measurement. Physical Review B 51, 15074-15078.                                                                                                                                  |
| Novikov, D.S., Fieremans, E., Jespersen, S.N., Kiselev, V.G., 2019. Quantifying brain microstructure with diffusion MRI: Theory and parameter estimation. NMRBiomed 32, e3998.                                                                                                           |
| Ozarslan, E., 2009. Compartment shape anisotropy (CSA) revealed by double pulsed field gradient MR. J Magn Reson 199, 56-67.                                                                                                                                                             |
| Ozarslan, E., Basser, P.J., 2008. Microscopic anisotropy revealed by NMR double pulsed field gradient experiments with arbitrary timing parameters. J Chem Phys 128, 154511.                                                                                                             |
| Ozarslan, E., Yolcu, C., Herberthson, M., Knutsson, H., Westin, C.F., 2018. Influence of the size and curvedness of neural projections on the orientationally averaged diffusion MRsignal. Front Phys 6.                                                                                 |
| Palombo, M., Alexander, D.C., Zhang, H., 2019. A generative model of realistic brain cells with application to numerical simulation of the diffusion-weighted MRsignal. Neuroimage 188, 391-402.                                                                                         |
| Palombo, M., Ligneul, C., Najac, C., Le Douce, J., Flament, J., Escartin, C., Hantraye, P., Brouillet, E., Bonvento, G., Valette, J., 2016. New paradigm to assess brain cell morphology by diffusion-weighted MR spectroscopy in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113, 6671-6676.         |
| Palombo, M., Ligneul, C., Valette, J., 2017. Modeling diffusion of intracellular metabolites in the mouse brain up to very high diffusion-weighting: Diffusion in long fibers (almost) accounts for non- monoexponential attenuation. Magn Reson Med.                                    |
| Palombo M, N.D., Alexander DC, Zhang H, Shemesh N 2019. Histological validation of the brain cell body imaging with diffusion MRI at ultrahigh field. Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med.; #0652.                                                                                          |
| Palombo, M., Shemesh, N., Ianus, A., Alexander, D.C., Zhang, G.H., 2018a. Abundance of cell bodies can explain the stick model's failure to describe high b-value diffusion signal in grey matter Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med.; #0892.                                                    |
| Palombo, M., Shemesh, N., Ianus, A., Alexander, D.C., Zhang, G.H., 2018b. A compartment based model for non-invasive cell body imaging by diffusion MRI. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. #1096.                                                                                              |
| Palombo, M., Shemesh, N., Ronen, I., Valette, J., 2018c. Insights into brain microstructure from in vivo DW-MRS. Neuroimage 182, 97-116.                                                                                                                                                 |
| Pfeuffer, J., Thic, I., Gruetter, R., 2000. Extracellular-Intracellular Distribution of Glucose and Lactate in the Rat Brain Assessed Noninvasively by Diffusion-Weighted IH Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy In Vivo. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism 20, 736-746. |
| Rensonnet, G., Scherrer, B., Girard, G., Jankovski, A., Warfield, S.K., Macq, B., Thiran, J.P., Taquet, M., 2019. Towards microstructure fingerprinting: Estimation of tissue properties from a dictionary of Monte Carlo diffusion MRI simulations. Neuroimage 184, 964-980.            |
| Ronen, I., Ercan, E., Webb, A., 2013. Axonal and glial microstructural information obtained with diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance spectroscopy at 7T. Front Integr Neurosci 7, 13.                                                                                                  |
| Shemesh, N., 2018. Axon Diameters and Myelin Content Modulate Microscopic Fractional Anisotropy at Short Diffusion Times in Fixed Rat Spinal Cord. Frontiers in Physics 6.                                                                                                               |

| Topgaard, D., Westin, C.F., 2016. Conventions and nomenclature for double diffusion encoding NMR and MRI. Magn Reson Med 75, 82-87.                                                                                                                         |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Shemesh, N., Ozarslan, E., Komlosh, M.E., Basser, P.J., Cohen, Y., 2010. From single-pulsed field gradient to double-pulsed field gradient MR: gleaning new microstructural information and developing new forms of contrast in MRI. NMRBiomed 23, 757-780. |
| Shemesh, N., Rosenberg, J.T., Dumez, J.N., Grant, S.C., Frydman, L., 2017. Distinguishing neuronal from astrocytic subcellular microstructures using in vivo Double Diffusion Encoded 1H MRS at 21.1 T. PLoS One 12, e0185232.                              |
| Shemesh, N., Rosenberg, J.T., Dumez, J.N., Muniz, J.A., Grant, S.C., Frydman, L., 2014. Metabolic properties in stroked rats revealed by relaxation-enhanced magnetic resonance spectroscopy at ultrahigh fields. Nat Commun 5, 4958.                       |
| Sherwood, C.C., Holloway, R.L., Erwin, J.M., Schleicher, A., Zilles, K., Hof, P.R., 2004. Cortical orofacial motor representation in Old World monkeys, great apes, and humans. I. Quantitative analysis of cytoarchitecture. Brain Behav Evol 63, 61-81.   |
| Stejskal, E.O., Tanner, J.E., 1965. Spin diffusion measurements: spin echoes in the presence of a time- dependent field gradient. The Journal of Chemical Physics 42, 288-292.                                                                              |
| Tkac, I., Oz, G., Adriany, G., Ugurbil, K., Gruetter, R., 2009. In vivo 1H NMR spectroscopy of the human brain at high magnetic fields: metabolite quantification at 4T vs. 7T. Magn Reson Med 62, 868-879.                                                 |

Figure 1: Examples of experimental data. (A) One dataset acquired using DDE-MRS (Δ/δ/TM=30/4.5/29.5 ms, b=10 ms/µm² per diffusion block), displaying the angular dependency of peak amplitudes.  The  top-right  inset  shows  the  voxel  positioned  in  the  mouse  hippocampus. (B) Spectral decomposition of one diffusion-weighted spectrum using LCModel for 6 metabolites and macromolecules.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1908.00317v1-figure-b7ff10f9-b3dd-447f-895a-8936f9ed99ee.jpg)

Figure 2: Signal modulation in respect to angular values for all 6 metabolites as well as macromolecules. Each experimental point corresponds to the ratio of the signal intensity obtained for b=20 ms/µm² and ϕ= 0-360°  to  the  signal  intensity  obtained  for  b=0.02  ms/µm².  The  gray  line  corresponds  to  the  function A+B×cos (2ϕ) fitted to the experimental data. Data was acquired in four mice. Error bars stand for the standard deviation.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1908.00317v1-figure-8e7f41e0-2d60-44f8-a10e-fe1493fc0cac.jpg)

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1908.00317v1-figure-eeeb7282-e7a4-41ff-aa6c-303aa98d1610.jpg)

Dfree

Dfree

Figure 3: Heatmaps of the averaged error estimated for all Dfree (0.1- 0.5 µm²/ms) and dfiber (0.1- 5 µm) values for each metabolite, when using a model of isotropically oriented cylinders simulated by MISST. The colormap represents the cost function 𝑐 = 7∑ &gt; (𝑥: - 𝑦 : )² , 𝑥: being the simulated diffusion signal attenuation and 𝑦: the experimentally measured signal attenuation for the angle ϕ.

A

C-1

3

5

0.1

5

8

2

0.2

Dfree

(um?Ims)

BIA ratio (A.U.)

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.3

0.4

Dfree

(um?Ims)

Dfree

Figure  4: A  and  B  coefficients  obtained  after  fitting  the  simulated  dataset  in  MISST  to  the 𝐴 + 𝐵 × cos	(2𝜑) function. (A) Variations of the A coefficient with respect to Dfree and dfiber. As expected, the  overall  signal  attenuation  increases  with  Dfree  as  well  as  in  wider  fibers. (B) Variations  of  the  B coefficient with respect to Dfree and dfiber. The amplitude of the signal angular modulation is impacted by both Dfree and dfiber, making it challenging to use this parameter to accurately estimate dfiber. The sensitivity to  d fiber values below 3 µm appears limited, even for a fixed Dfree. (C-1) ! " ratios  for  all  D free and dfiber values. (C-2) Zoom-in  on  a  realistic  range  of  Dfree  (0.3-0.45  µm /ms)  and  dfiber  (0.5-2  µm)  values,  as 2 delineated by the square shown in C-1. The ! " ratios do not vary according to dfiber, therefore confirming the poor sensitivity of DDE-MRS experiments to this structural parameter.

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1908.00317v1-figure-2043b61c-f6c2-4799-9cde-d6fac20d5e07.jpg)

Dfree

C-2

BIA ratio (A.U.)

0.5

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1908.00317v1-figure-255753be-d672-4c91-85c9-3701c7082fef.jpg)

Figure  5: Representation  of  the  isotropically  oriented  infinite  cylinders  in  MISST  together  with  a superposition of a simulated signal obtained for dfiber=1 µm and Dfree=0.35 µm²/ms (grey square) to NAA (blue circle) and Ins (orange triangle) experimental data. The amplitude of signal modulation obtained in the simulated case is markedly higher than in the case of our experimental data.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1908.00317v1-figure-22dc3fc2-8b0d-44f6-8b70-7b0c4d986cfa.jpg)

Figure 6: Four simulated datasets superposed to NAA and Ins experimental data. (A) DDE signal and ! " ratio for a model of short connected fibers. (B) DDE signal and ! " ratio for a model of connected fibers exhibiting short segments and branching (Nbranch=4). (C) DDE signal and ! " ratio for a model of a 10-µm diameter soma connected to long fibers. The soma volume fraction is ~16%. Note that fibers are cut on the figure (double dash lines). (D) DDE signal and ! " ratio for a 10-µm diameter soma connected to fibers with short segments and branching (Nbranch=4). The succession of short segments across successive embranchments  appears  to  best  explain  our  experimental  data  when  comparing ! " ratios.  Adding  a  cell body has little impact on B/A, although it shifts overall signal attenuation (~A) towards lower value (as increased Dfree would do).

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1908.00317v1-figure-bb022d4e-ca64-4daa-bdc5-8134b749e876.jpg)

Figure  7: Comparison  of  experimental  signal  attenuation  (mean±s.d.  over  4  animals  in  each  group) measured for TM=5.5 and 29.5 ms for 5 metabolites (taurine could not be measured at TM=5.5 ms). For most metabolites it is clear that a peak appears at ϕ=180° when shortening TM.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1908.00317v1-figure-0b246dcb-26e4-4e99-8d61-ea67a9a7bd94.jpg)

|                                         | METABOLITES                             | METABOLITES                             | METABOLITES                             | METABOLITES                             | METABOLITES                             | METABOLITES                             |
|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                                         | NAA (neuronal marker)                   | tCr                                     | Tau                                     | Ins (glial marker)                      | tCho (glial marker)                     | Lac                                     |
| FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              | FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              | FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              | FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              | FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              | FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              | FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              |
| Offset (A)                              | 0.293±0.004                             | 0.235±0.012                             | 0.197±0.011                             | 0.228±0.016                             | 0.286±0.018                             | 0.130±0.004                             |
| Amplitude Modulation (B)                | 0.040±0.004                             | 0.036±0.004                             | 0.035±0.005                             | 0.030±0.003                             | 0.029±0.003                             | 0.028±0.006                             |
| B/A ratio                               | 0.137±0.014                             | 0.155±0.020                             | 0.177±0.024                             | 0.132±0.015                             | 0.101±0.014                             | 0.212±0.051                             |
| FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL | FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL | FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL | FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL | FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL | FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL | FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL |
| Dfree (µm²/ms)                          | 0.20±0.02                               | 0.22±0.04                               | 0.25±0.03                               | 0.21±0.03                               | 0.17±0.02                               | 0.34±0.06                               |
| d (µm)                                  | 3.22±0.29                               | 3.89±0.43                               | 4.20±0.26                               | 4.14±0.0.15                             | 3.76±0.30                               | 4.80±0.27                               |

Table 1: Top part: A and B coefficients obtained for each metabolite when fitting the function A + B × cos  (2φ).  The  B  coefficient  is  higher  for  neuronal  than  glial  marker.  Error  corresponds  to  the  standard deviation calculated over four animals. Bottom part: Dfree and dfiber values corresponding to the best fit for each metabolite to a basis of simulated signals using the infinite cylinder model. Error on Dfree and d was estimated using Monte Carlo simulations. Dfree appears underestimated whereas dfiber is overestimated.

|                                         | METABOLITES                              | GEOMETRIES                              | GEOMETRIES                              | GEOMETRIES                              | GEOMETRIES                              | GEOMETRIES                              |
|-----------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                                         | Average over NAA, tCr, Tau, Ins and tCho | Infinite cylinders                      | Short fibers, no soma                   | Branched fibers, no soma                | Long fibers + Soma                      | Branched fibers + soma                  |
| FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              | FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)               | FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              | FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              | FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              | FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              | FITTING TO A + B × cos(2ϕ)              |
| Offset (A)                              | 0.248±0.041                              | 0.247±0.008                             | 0.257±0.006                             | 0.353±0.005                             | 0.181±0.006                             | 0.290±0.006                             |
| Amplitude Modulation (B)                | 0.033±0.005                              | 0.081±0.011                             | 0.062±0.009                             | 0.055±0.007                             | 0.055±0.009                             | 0.046±0.008                             |
| B/A ratio                               | 0.152±0.039                              | 0.326±0.045                             | 0.242±0.033                             | 0.156±0.020                             | 0.306±0.050                             | 0.158±0.027                             |
| FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL | FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL  | FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL | FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL | FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL | FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL | FITTING TO THE INFINITE CYLINDERS MODEL |
| Dfree (µm²/ms)                          | 0.21±0.03                                | 0.35±0.00                               | 0.27±0.02                               | 0.20±0.01                               | 0.33±0.03                               | 0.20±0.02                               |
| d (µm)                                  | 4.00±0.52                                | 1.00±0.00                               | 2.65±0.39                               | 1.89±0.54                               | 3.69±0.26                               | 3.19±0.29                               |

Table  2: Top  part: A,  B  and ! " values  obtained  for  each  model  (infinite  cylinder  model  and  3D-cell simulations) when fitting the function A + B × cos (2φ). These values can be compared to the grey column on the left-hand side that indicates the average A, B and ! " calculated over five metabolites (mean ± s.d.). Error  on  parameters  extracted  from  geometric  models  (Dfree,  d)  was  estimated  using  Monte  Carlo simulations. Models exhibiting embranchments exhibit lower ! " values that better match our experimental data. Bottom part: Fitting to the infinite cylinders model for each 3D-cell simulation. This model fails to yield the expected ground truth values for Dfree and dfiber (i.e. 0.35 µm²/ms and 1 µm) for all simulations. Most  strikingly,  the  obtained  values  are  close  to  that  of  the  average  Dfree  and  dfiber  obtained  for  our experimental data (mean ± s.d. over five metabolites), further illustrating the fact that the infinite cylinders model does not satisfactorily describe the experimental data.

|                       | METABOLITES           | METABOLITES   | METABOLITES        | METABOLITES            | METABOLITES   | GEOMETRIES   | GEOMETRIES   | GEOMETRIES   | GEOMETRIES   |
|-----------------------|-----------------------|---------------|--------------------|------------------------|---------------|--------------|--------------|--------------|--------------|
| 𝐒(𝛗 = 𝟏𝟖𝟎°) 𝐒(𝛗 = 𝟎°) | NAA (neuronal marker) | tCr           | Ins (glial marker) | tCho (glial marker) ** | Lac           | Short Fibers | Branching    | Soma         | All features |
| TM=5.5 ms             | 1.08±0.04             | 1.09±0.06     | 1.14±0.07          | 1.26±0.05              | 1.14±0.12     | 1.07         | 1.04         | 1.16         | 1.12         |
| TM=29.5 ms            | 1.02±0.01             | 1.08±0.01     | 1.03±0.02          | 1.02±0.01              | 1.04±0.07     | 1.05         | 1.03         | 1.03         | 1.04         |

Table 3: Left-hand side: / 01234 / 014 ratio obtained for five metabolites at TM=5.5/ 29.5 ms. This ratio tends to increase for all metabolites except tCr at shorter TM, however this increase is statistically significant in the case of tCho only. Error corresponds to the standard deviation calculated over four animals. ** p&lt;0.05 according  to  Kruskal-Wallis  test. Right-hand  side: / 01234 / 014 calculated  on  simulated  signals  for  the  four models presented in Figure 7 . This ratio greatly increases when including a soma in our simulation model, suggesting an increased sensitivity to cell bodies when shortening TM.
Melissa Vincent Marco Palombo Julien Valette
Revisiting double diffusion encoding MRS in the mouse brain at 11.7T: which microstructural features are we sensitive to?
Brain metabolites, such as N-acetylaspartate or myo-inositol, are constantly
probing their local cellular environment under the effect of diffusion.
Diffusion-weighted NMR spectroscopy therefore presents unparalleled potential
to yield cell-type specific microstructural information. Double diffusion
encoding (DDE) relies on two diffusion blocks which relative directions
describe a varying angle during the course of the experiment. Unlike single
diffusion encoding, DDE measurements at long mixing time display some angular
modulation of the signal amplitude which reflects compartment shape anisotropy,
while requiring relatively low gradient strength. This angular dependence has
been formerly used to quantify cell fiber diameter using a model of
isotropically oriented infinite cylinders. However, it has been little explored
how additional features of the cell microstructure, such as cell body diameter,
fiber length and branching may also influence the DDE signal. Here, we used a
cryoprobe as well as state-of-the-art post-processing to perform DDE
acquisitions with high accuracy and precision in the mouse brain at 11.7 T. We
then compared our results to simulated DDE datasets obtained in various 3D cell
models in order to pinpoint which features of cell morphology may influence the
most the angular dependence of the DDE signal. While the infinite cylinder
model poorly fits our experimental data, we show that incorporating branched
fiber structure in our model is paramount to sensibly interpret the DDE signal.
Lastly, experiments and simulations in the short mixing time regime suggest
that some sensitivity to cell body diameter might be retrieved, although
additional experiments would be required to further support this statement.