Freesurfer

freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu

30088 discussions

Maximum significance
by Yang, Daniel 17 Sep '13

17 Sep '13

Hi all, I performed cluster analyses and obtained several clusters, which are indicated by the corresponding maximum significance levels. For example, cluster one -- 4.00, and cluster two -- 4.00. Then I did a conjunction analysis to see their overlap, and then did a mri_surfcluster to get the clusters from the overlap. Then I observed that I have TalX TalY TalZ for each cluster in the overlap -- my question is, how does mri_surfcluster determine those coordinates? Since the whole cluster might have the same significance level everywhere? Thanks, Daniel

1 0

R: Re: Effect size
by stdp82＠virgilio.it 17 Sep '13

17 Sep '13

Thank you very much Doug! Stefano ----Messaggio originale---- Da: greve(a)nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Data: 17-set-2013 22.25 A: <freesurfer(a)nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Ogg: Re: [Freesurfer] Effect size what do you mean exactly by "effect size"? gamma.mgh is the contrast value (C*beta) doug On 9/17/13 8:01 PM, Chung, Yoonho wrote: > Hi all, > > Where can I find the effect size file(.mgh) after running mri_glmfit when doing group analysis (control vs patients adjusting for age and sex)? Somewhere in the wiki said gamma.mgh is the surface overlay for effect size. Is this true? If not, how would I compute one? > > Yoon > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer(a)nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer > > _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer(a)nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly dispose of the e-mail.

1 0

Effect size
by Chung, Yoonho 17 Sep '13

17 Sep '13

Hi all, Where can I find the effect size file(.mgh) after running mri_glmfit when doing group analysis (control vs patients adjusting for age and sex)? Somewhere in the wiki said gamma.mgh is the surface overlay for effect size. Is this true? If not, how would I compute one? Yoon

2 1

covariates in cortical thickness analysis
by stdp82＠virgilio.it 17 Sep '13

17 Sep '13

Hi list, I'm performing cortical thickness analysis on 3 groups. One of these is a control groups. Mean cortical thickness in right and left hemispheres do not show any significativity among groups. I'd like to not use mean cortical thickness as covariate becouse it worsens and make difficult to explain results. May I do it? Thank you very much. Stefano

2 1

Mac OS X 10.8.5 breaks recon-all
by Peter J. Molfese 17 Sep '13

17 Sep '13

I updated my Mac OS X install to 10.8.5 late yesterday and now recon-all (FS 5.3) fails early in the processing pipeline (Talairach). I've attempted running the process with both my own data that works on Freesurfer 5.3 with 10.8.4 and receive the same error message. I have two identical computers, with only one updated to 10.8.5, which will make further testing straightforward. I attached the log below of the attempt to run the "bert" data with just one MRI. The error message is the same for other data. bugr output: --------------------------------------------------------------------- FREESURFER_HOME: /usr/local/freesurfer Build stamp: freesurfer-Darwin-lion-stable-pub-v5.3.0 Kernel info: Darwin 12.5.0 x86_64 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please include the following additional information in your report: 1) subject name - bert (and any other subject) 2) the entire command-line executed - recon-all -s bert -i /usr/local/freesurfer/subjects/bert/mri/orig/001.mgz -all -3T 3) the error message generated - see below 4) optionally include the subject's /script/recon-all.log See also: http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting =============== BEGIN ERROR REPORT =================== recon-all -s bert -i /usr/local/freesurfer/subjects/bert/mri/orig/001.mgz -all -3T Subject Stamp: freesurfer-Darwin-lion-stable-pub-v5.3.0 Current Stamp: freesurfer-Darwin-lion-stable-pub-v5.3.0 INFO: SUBJECTS_DIR is /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer Actual FREESURFER_HOME /usr/local/freesurfer Darwin frankie.haskins.lab 12.5.0 Darwin Kernel Version 12.5.0: Mon Jul 29 16:33:49 PDT 2013; root:xnu-2050.48.11~1/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64 dyld: DYLD_ environment variables being ignored because main executable (/usr/bin/top) is setuid or setgid /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert \n mri_convert /usr/local/freesurfer/subjects/bert/mri/orig/001.mgz /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/orig/001.mgz \n mri_convert /usr/local/freesurfer/subjects/bert/mri/orig/001.mgz /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/orig/001.mgz $Id: mri_convert.c,v 1.179.2.7 2012/09/05 21:55:16 mreuter Exp $ reading from /usr/local/freesurfer/subjects/bert/mri/orig/001.mgz... TR=0.00, TE=0.00, TI=0.00, flip angle=0.00 i_ras = (-1, 0, 0) j_ras = (0, 0, -1) k_ras = (0, 1, 0) writing to /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/orig/001.mgz... #-------------------------------------------- #@# MotionCor Tue Sep 17 12:49:59 EDT 2013 Found 1 runs /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/orig/001.mgz Checking for (invalid) multi-frame inputs... WARNING: only one run found. This is OK, but motion correction cannot be performed on one run, so I'll copy the run to rawavg and continue. \n cp /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/orig/001.mgz /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/rawavg.mgz \n /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert \n mri_convert /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/rawavg.mgz /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/orig.mgz --conform \n mri_convert /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/rawavg.mgz /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/orig.mgz --conform $Id: mri_convert.c,v 1.179.2.7 2012/09/05 21:55:16 mreuter Exp $ reading from /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/rawavg.mgz... TR=0.00, TE=0.00, TI=0.00, flip angle=0.00 i_ras = (-1, 0, 0) j_ras = (0, 0, -1) k_ras = (0, 1, 0) Original Data has (1, 1, 1) mm size and (256, 256, 256) voxels. Data is conformed to 1 mm size and 256 voxels for all directions changing data type from float to uchar (noscale = 0)... MRIchangeType: Building histogram writing to /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/orig.mgz... \n mri_add_xform_to_header -c /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/transforms/talairach.xfm /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/orig.mgz /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri/orig.mgz \n INFO: extension is mgz #-------------------------------------------- #@# Talairach Tue Sep 17 12:50:13 EDT 2013 /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/mri \n mri_nu_correct.mni --n 1 --proto-iters 1000 --distance 50 --no-rescale --i orig.mgz --o orig_nu.mgz \n Darwin frankie.haskins.lab 12.5.0 Darwin Kernel Version 12.5.0: Mon Jul 29 16:33:49 PDT 2013; root:xnu-2050.48.11~1/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64 recon-all -s bert exited with ERRORS at Tue Sep 17 12:50:20 EDT 2013 For more details, see the log file /Volumes/MRIData/srtt/freesurfer/bert/scripts/recon-all.log To report a problem, see http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting

2 4

Re: [Freesurfer] Significant clusters before and after Monte Carlo
by Anita van Loenhoud 17 Sep '13

17 Sep '13

Hi Doug, It is finally starting to make sense to me. It was indeed the case that before Monte Carlo, within a cluster there were different values for each vertex, and after Monte Carlo, each vertex had the same value. I had difficulty understanding the different functions of the color scale min/max threshold and the vertexwise threshold. Is the following correct: The min/max threshold is nothing more than a visualisation threshold; it does not change anything in subsequent analyses that are performed (such as Monte Carlo), it just decides which results are significant enough to be colored or opaque. The vertexwise threshold (the one that is next to Monte Carlo) is the one that decides which vertices should be considered in the simulation. So a vertexwise threshold of 2 only takes vertices into account that have a p value < 0.01. After Monte Carlo, the min/max (visualisation) threshold now decides which cluster wise p-values (cwp's) should be shown in color. So, compared to before Monte Carlo, it now has a slightly different function: it does not decide which individual vertices, but which clusters should be colored/opaque. One last question (if the above is correct): could one decide to set the vertex wise threshold at 1.3 for example, and the visualisation threshold at 2? Or do both threshold always have to be the same? Thanks a lot for your help, Anita

2 2

mris_anatomical_stats
by Gomar, Jesus 17 Sep '13

17 Sep '13

Dear Freesurfer experts, I hope someone can help me with a couple of questions regarding the use of mris_anatomical_stats command: 1. I am using mris_anatomical_stats to compute perirhinal thickness but with subjects I had previously recon through v5.1.0, and of course the mris_anatomical_stas failed because there is no perirhinal label. Is there a shorcut to compute perirhinal thickness without re-runnig recon-all again with v5.2.0/5.3.0? 2. When using mris_anatomical_stats, Can I compute measures for a list of subjects using something similar to --subjectsfile? It doesn't say so in the --help, but I thought perhaps there might be a way. Thank you very much! Jesus The information contained in this electronic e-mail transmission and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom or to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this communication is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this communication to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or disclosure of this communication and any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone and electronic mail, and delete the original communication and any attachment from any computer, server or other electronic recording or storage device or medium. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient is not a waiver of any attorney-client, physician-patient or other privilege.

2 1

Re: [Freesurfer] Significant clusters before and after Monte Carlo
by Anita van Loenhoud 17 Sep '13

17 Sep '13

Hi Doug, I mean that before doing any correction, I can press 'Find Clusters and Goto Max', which will show me clusters based on my visualisation threshold. As far as I understood, it will go to the most significant vertex within each cluster and display that value. So before Monte Carlo, I found a cluster in the RMF, and the most significant vertex in there was -4.42. After Monte Carlo, I again see a cluster in the RMF. Now, when I again press 'Find Clusters and Goto Max' it gives me a new value of -2.19. I guess I have a difficulty with interpreting these 'new values' after Monte Carlo. Do I understand correctly from your previous comment that after this correction, they don't correspond to single vertices anymore? If my question is too elaborate for this mailinglist, could you recomment me some literature that might help me? Thanks so much! Anita

2 1

Re: [Freesurfer] MNI coordinates
by Douglas Greve 17 Sep '13

17 Sep '13

It was not in version 5.1, try 5.3 or let me know what platform you are using and I can send it to you. doug ps. Please remember to post to the list and not to us personally. thanks! On 9/17/13 2:09 AM, Simon Baker wrote: > Hi Doug, > > There are several posts in which you mention the mri_surfcluster > --centroid option as a method for obtaining MNI coordinates of the > centroid of each parcellation label. When I type the below command, I > get and error saying "ERROR: Option --centroid unknown". What am I > doing wrong? > > mri_surfcluster --in lh.thickness --clabel lh.G_and_S_cingul-Ant.label > --sum sum.lh.G_and_S_cingul-Ant --centroid --thmin 0 --hemi lh > --subject ### > > I am using Freesurfer version 5.1 and the Destrieux parcellation. > > Thank you, > > Simon > > > > On 24 July 2013 13:59, Douglas Greve <greve(a)nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>> wrote: > > > We don't have those number available, but you can generate them > with something like: > > #1 Convert the annotation to a set of labels. This is for the > Desikan atlas, but you can spec the destrieux instead > mri_annotation2label --subject fsaverage --hemi lh --outdir > ~/tmp/aparc > > # For each label, run mri_surfcluster to get the centroid > mri_surfcluster --in ~/subjects/fsaverage/surf/lh.thickness > --clabel lh.pericalcarine.label --sum sum.lh.pericalcarine > --centroid --thmin 0 --hemi lh --subject fsaverage > > This will actually be weighted by the thickness, but that should > not matter much > > The centroid coordinates will be in MNI305 space > > doug > > > > > On 7/23/13 11:57 AM, LAOUCHEDI MAKHLOUF wrote: >> Hi >> i am using corticals parcels (destrieux) as nodes in a >> connectivity study using the NBS (Network Based Statistics) tool; >> i want to assign MNI coordinates for these nodes. is there any >> MNI coordinates in freesurfer for each component of this >> parcellation (not for every vertex in those components) or any >> other strategy to assign coordinates for these components ? >> >> otherwise, i intend to non-linearily register the freesurfer's >> labels for a healthy subject in MNI and for each label i will use >> coordinates of one of its points to represent that label >> >> thanks for help >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Freesurfer mailing list >> Freesurfer(a)nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> >> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer(a)nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer > > > The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to > whom it is > addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and > the e-mail > contains patient information, please contact the Partners > Compliance HelpLine at > http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to > you in error > but does not contain patient information, please contact the > sender and properly > dispose of the e-mail. > > > > > -- > > Simon Baker > PhD Candidate > Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences > Monash University

1 0

Intracranial volume measures
by Rashmi Singh 16 Sep '13

16 Sep '13

Hello FreeSurfer experts I was looking into the aseg.stat files following reconall runs and found that intracranial volume measurements were really small for some subjects, while other measures were comparable ( example below) May you suggest the reason for that. Cortex vol lhcorticalWM rhcorticalWM subcortWM Total GM Supratentovol ICV 604672.2727 293117.0313 295386.1719 588503.2031 137454 742126.2727 1305366.506 2295517.424 508022.5115 277588.2969 273433.7188 551022.0156 141394 649416.5115 1172142.031 807193.8392 538498.8818 212168.7188 211857.9063 424026.625 141688 680186.8818 1057642.049 1100334.147 573133.8927 270262.7813 271187.8125 541450.5938 128431 701564.8927 1217341.888 354564.6828 Thanks, Rashmi

1 0

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Freesurfer