目的  基于灰质体积和皮层厚度，构建结构协变网络，探讨不同昼夜节律偏好人群脑结构协变网络鲁棒性的差异。 方法  使用CAT12工具箱提取早时型和晚时型志愿者脑灰质形态学指标，依据LPBA40图谱和Desikan-Killiany图谱，分别构建基于灰质体积、皮层厚度的结构协变网络,并使用GAT工具箱解算图论参数及结构协变网络对抗蓄意攻击的承受能力，观察网络的鲁棒性。 结果  在以灰质体积构建的结构协变网络中，当使用介数中心性作为蓄意攻击的目标，网络相对大小作为网络鲁棒性的评价指标时，早时型志愿者结构协变网络鲁棒性强于晚时型志愿者（P<0.05）；当使用节点度作为蓄意攻击的目标，网络相对大小作为网络鲁棒性的评价指标时，早时型志愿者结构协变网络鲁棒性与晚时型志愿者相比差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。在以皮层厚度构建的结构协变网络中，当使用介数中心性或节点度作为蓄意攻击的目标，网络相对大小作为网络鲁棒性的评价指标时，早时型志愿者结构协变网络鲁棒性均弱于晚时型志愿者（P<0.05）。 结论  不同昼夜节律偏好人群脑灰质形态间协变关系存在差异，结构协变网络鲁棒性可能是其表现之一，这为昼夜节律相关的神经解剖学特征提供了新的理解。

Objective  To explore the differences in the robustness of structural covariance networks among populations with different circadian rhythm preferences, and to constructing brain structural covariance networks based on gray matter volume and cortical thickness. Methods  Morphological metrics of gray matter from early chronotype and late chronotype volunteers was extracted by using the CAT12 toolbox. Structural covariance networks based on gray matter volume and cortical thickness were constructed according to the LPBA40 atlas and Desikan-Killiany atlas. Graph theoretical parameters were calculated and the resilience of structural covariance networks against deliberate attacks were assessed by utilizing the GAT toolbox to observe the network’s robustness. Results  In the structural covariance network constructed based on gray matter volume, when using betweenness centrality as the target of deliberate attacks and network size as the measure of network robustness, the structural covariance network of early chronotype volunteers exhibits greater robustness than that of late chronotype volunteers (P<0.05).When using node degree as the target of deliberate attacks and network size as the evaluation metric for network robustness, the structural covariance network robustness of early chronotype volunteers showed no statistically significant difference compared with the late chronotype volunteers (P>0.05).In the structural covariance network constructed based on cortical thickness, when using betweenness centrality or node degree as the targets of deliberate attacks, and network size as the evaluation metric for network robustness, the structural covariance network robustness of early chronotype volunteers was weaker than that of late chronotype volunteers (P<0.05). Conclusion  The covariance relationships among brain gray matter morphology vary among populations with different circadian rhythm preferences, and the differences in structural covariance network robustness may be one of the manifestations, which provides a new understanding of the neuroanatomical features related to circadian rhythm.