TABLE 6.

ANOVA.

Network ROI	Pre-exercise		Post-exercise		Pre-exercise	Post-exercise
	Control	CFS	Control	CFS
Reciprocal exercise effects in sedentary control and CFS
DMN_mPFC	2.761 ± 1.010	2.329 ± 0.865	2.100 ± 0.740	2.965 ± 0.776		Post CFS > SC p = 0.001
Exercise effect (paired t-test)					SC: Pre > Post p = 0.0029	CFS: Post > Pre p = 0.00036
					Pre SC > CFS	Post SC > CFS
Persistent deficit in CFS preexercise and postexercise
SAL_mIns	1.358 ± 0.594	1.041 ± 0.249	1.328 ± 0.325	1.058 ± 0.263	0.008	0.031
SUB_Midbrain	0.948 ± 0.362	0.739 ± 0.205	1.023 ± 0.378	0.778 ± 0.187	0.031	0.008
SUB_Pons	1.102 ± 0.563	0.822 ± 0.346	1.074 ± 0.469	0.787 ± 0.206	0.046	0.038
VIS0063	1.597 ± 0.650	1.207 ± 0.329	1.585 ± 0.560	1.227 ± 0.403	0.015	0.031
Baseline preexercise CFS deficit
DAN_LIPS	1.944 ± 0.796	1.474 ± 0.399	1.855 ± 0.621	1.526 ± 0.418	0.01
DMN_PCC	2.019 ± 0.484	1.713 ± 0.330	1.931 ± 0.457	1.704 ± 0.467	0.045
FP_biTPar	2.191 ± 0.563	1.771 ± 0.368	2.130 ± 0.614	1.923 ± 0.432	0.009
FP_RPar	2.139 ± 0.815	1.673 ± 0.520	1.815 ± 0.535	1.652 ± 0.434	0.015
SAL_SMA	1.959 ± 0.880	1.339 ± 0.435	1.639 ± 0.397	1.360 ± 0.313	0
SMN_RS2	1.644 ± 0.772	1.164 ± 0.398	1.587 ± 0.645	1.289 ± 0.554	0.014
SMN_LS2	1.482 ± 0.788	1.007 ± 0.321	1.459 ± 0.675	1.117 ± 0.420	0.009
SUB_Thal	1.021 ± 0.361	0.832 ± 0.189	1.015 ± 0.248	0.850 ± 0.209	0.028
SUB_vDien	0.831 ± 0.298	0.670 ± 0.124	0.836 ± 0.217	0.710 ± 0.163	0.017
Exercise induced deficit in CFS
VIS0017	1.315 ± 0.718	1.057 ± 0.409	1.434 ± 0.714	1.018 ± 0.381		0.027
VIS0054	1.462 ± 0.574	1.156 ± 0.349	1.538 ± 0.577	1.186 ± 0.335		0.022
VIS0041	1.622 ± 0.743	1.306 ± 0.445	1.632 ± 0.693	1.231 ± 0.420		0.045
VIS0053	1.782 ± 0.965	1.416 ± 0.416	1.838 ± 0.774	1.375 ± 0.421		0.041
No differences between CFS and control before or after exercise
DAN_RIPS	2.321 ± 0.864	1.870 ± 0.516	2.275 ± 0.826	1.949 ± 0.555
FP_DLPFC	2.373 ± 0.798	1.978 ± 0.608	2.238 ± 0.655	1.895 ± 0.450
FP_biPar	2.055 ± 0.691	1.690 ± 0.497	1.985 ± 0.642	1.666 ± 0.404
SAL_dACC	1.843 ± 0.696	1.520 ± 0.365	1.841 ± 0.516	1.577 ± 0.293
SAL_aIns	2.131 ± 0.748	1.777 ± 0.507	2.077 ± 0.508	1.756 ± 0.405
SUB_Vermis	1.271 ± 0.568	0.966 ± 0.337	1.355 ± 0.532	1.054 ± 0.353
VIS0024	1.757 ± 0.778	1.429 ± 0.404	1.823 ± 0.795	1.443 ± 0.586
DMN_Prec	2.821 ± 0.746	2.767 ± 0.633	2.856 ± 0.816	2.727 ± 0.567
FP_LPar	2.069 ± 0.832	1.741 ± 0.447	1.921 ± 0.641	1.723 ± 0.373
SMN_biM1	1.547 ± 0.708	1.251 ± 0.409	1.559 ± 0.506	1.342 ± 0.538
SMN_biS1	1.355 ± 0.609	1.058 ± 0.345	1.276 ± 0.464	1.166 ± 0.442

Node amplitude strengths were the average of the signal over the 7 min resting scan time series for each node and subject. Multivariate general linear modeling (GLM) of the strengths in each node utilized Disease status, Orthostatic status and gender as fixed factors and age and BMI as co-variates. Nodes that were significantly different based on Disease status (CFS vs. control) after accounting for the other variables were indicated by “GLM.” Orthostatic status and BMI were not significant variables in the models and were removed from further models. Because (a) age was a significant variable for many nodes by univariate analysis and (b) the groups had unequal gender proportions, the raw strengths were regressed against age and gender. Significant differences between control and CFS on preexercise and postexercise days were calculated using ANOVA with Tukey Honest Significant Difference to correct for multiple comparisons. Node amplitude strength was reported as mean ± SD. Significant Tukey results were reported for Preexercise Control > CFS, Postexercise Control > CFS, and CFS > Control. Exercise effects on each group were assessed by paired t-tests.