Freesurfer

freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu

16 participants
30065 discussions

Hippocampus subfields {Disarmed}
by 郑凤莲 03 Mar '18

03 Mar '18

Hi Experts, I ran the segmentation of hippocampus in Freesurfer dev version. The left or right whole volume isn't equal to the sum of 12 subfields. But it is equal to the sum of the volume of tail, whole head and body. Why? I am looking forward to your reply. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Zheng | | 13181786167 邮箱：13181786167(a)163.com | 签名由网易邮箱大师定制

1 0

error ruining bedpost (-bedp)
by Alexopoulos, Dimitrios 02 Mar '18

02 Mar '18

Hi, I'm running tracula and having some issues. Using FS5.3, I have run successfully (without errors) 'recon-all -all', then 'trac-all -prep -c dmrirc'. I then get an error (below) running 'trac-all -bep -c dmrirc'. The 'dmri' directory is generated from the -prop step above. [jimalex@login01 freesurfer]$ trac-all -bedp -c dmrirc INFO: SUBJECTS_DIR is /scratch/jimalex/freesurfer INFO: Diffusion root is /scratch/jimalex/freesurfer Actual FREESURFER_HOME /act/freesurfer-5.3.0-HCP INFO: FreeSurfer build stamps do not match Subject Stamp: freesurfer-Linux-centos6_x86_64-stable-pub-v5.3.0 Current Stamp: freesurfer-Linux-centos6_x86_64-stable-pub-v5.3.0-HCP INFO: current FREESURFER_HOME does not match that of previous processing. Current: /act/freesurfer-5.3.0-HCP Previous: /data/gizmo/data1/freesurfer5.3 WARN: Running FSL's bedbost locally - this might take a while WARN: It is recommended to run this step on a cluster bedpostx_mgh -n 2 /scratch/jimalex/freesurfer/neo321e_chpc/dmri subjectdir is /scratch/jimalex/freesurfer/neo321e_chpc/dmri /scratch/jimalex/freesurfer/neo321e_chpc/dmri/data not found [jimalex@login01 freesurfer]$ ________________________________ The materials in this message are private and may contain Protected Healthcare Information or other information of a sensitive nature. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return mail.

1 0

Possible mri_cc error - process failed
by Matthew Grecsek 02 Mar '18

02 Mar '18

My recon-all ended prematurely with the following message: final transformation (x=136.0, yr=-10.054, zr=-0.114): 0.98464 0.00200 -0.17457 15.51372; -0.00197 1.00000 0.00035 17.22442; 0.17457 0.00000 0.98464 -17.83761; 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 1.00000; mri_cc: no WM voxels found with norm > 40 -- check skull stripping No such file or directory Linux centos-7-1 3.10.0-693.17.1.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Jan 25 20:13:58 UTC 2018 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux recon-all -s matt2 exited with ERRORS at Thu Mar 1 04:35:09 UTC 2018 I am running: freesurfer-Linux-centos6_x86_64-stable-pub-v6.0.0-2beb96c My full log file is attached. Please let me know suggestions for correcting and continuing the process. Thanks, -Matt

2 1

QA tools
by Micah Rhodes 01 Mar '18

01 Mar '18

Dear Freesurfer list, As I have used the QA tools on a couple recon-all jobs, I have run into an error when running recon_checker QA tools. The QA tools are not able to read many of the output files from recon-all, in the "label" directory. As I look back into the label directory, this is because many of my files after running recon have an "_exvivo" stem. For example, the QA tools cannot read the "../label/lh.BA1.label" file because in my subject directory, as it is named "../label/lh.BA1_exvivo.label". And the same is true for many other files. After searching online for solutions to this problem I have not found any way to eliminate the _exvivio stem, but I understand that exvivo data has been used to increase the quality of images for FS v6. Is there a way to fix this when running recon-all? Or, is this problem occurring because I'm using QAtools1.2 with FS v6.0? Best, Micah

1 0

bad aseg but WM and pial surfaces look good
by C.P.E. Rollins 01 Mar '18

01 Mar '18

Hi Freesurfer developers, I've processed my sample of T1 scans through recon-all and have corrected the pial and WM surfaces. The surfaces look mostly good, though when I checked the aseg segmentations they are pretty poor and there is huge variability in the volumes I get from asegstats2table (for instance, Left-Lateral-Ventricle is anywhere from 3773.1 to 22575.9). I was wondering if there's any way to improve the subcortical segmentations? Moreover, if the subcortical segmentations are poor, should I worry that there might also be errors in my cortical thickness or local gyrification index calculations (though the values for these show much less variability). Many thanks, Colleen -- Colleen Rollins, PhD Candidate Department of Psychiatry University of Cambridge Herchel Smith Building, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 0SZ

2 1

Hippocampal subfields {Disarmed}
by 郑凤莲 01 Mar '18

01 Mar '18

Hi professors, I ran the segmentation of hippocampus in Freesurfer dev version. The left or right whole volume isn't equal to the sum of 12 subfields. But it is equal to the sum of the volume of tail, whole head and body. Why? I am looking forward to your reply. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Zheng | | 13181786167 邮箱：13181786167(a)163.com | 签名由网易邮箱大师定制

1 0

TRACULA registration
by Gabriela Longo 28 Feb '18

28 Feb '18

Hi, I processed some subjects in TRACULA for a longitudinal evaluation. I registered all of them in the MNI template (set doregmni = 1 set mnitemp = $FSLDIR/data/standard/MNI152_T1_1mm_brain.nii.gz). I checked the registration of my dtifit_FA.bbr.nii.gz with the MNI of all subjects. However, when I performed the group analysis, I got more NaN than expected and I checked the images and the results are outside the MNI template (I am sending a picture). I went back and checked the registration of the paths. Despite the dtifit_FA.bbr.nii.gz is correctly registered in the MNI, the paths aren't. I am struggling here to find solutions. I really appreciate any insight to help me to solve this issue. Thanks in advance, Gabriela Longo [image: Imagem inline 2]

2 19

mri_segstats - CTABWriteFileASCII; could not open file for writing
by Yash Patel 28 Feb '18

28 Feb '18

Hello FreeSurfer experts, I am attempting to run "mri_segstats --annot [subjectid] lh aparc --sum [outputpath] --i [inputfile] --id 1001 --id 1002 ... --id 1035" Whenever I try, I receive the following error (in error.log file); CTABwriteFileASCII(/tmp/mri_segstats.tmp.brno/661A.long.024ns.lh.15.ctab): could not open for writing CTABreadASCII(/tmp/mri_segstats.tmp.brno/661A.long.024ns.lh.15.ctab): could not open file The output in the command prompt is below: cmdline mri_segstats --annot brno/661A.long.024ns lh aparc --i vol2surf/661A.v2s.0.5pf.mgh --sum stats/661A.05pf.sum --id 1001 --id 1002 --id 1003 --id 1005 --id 1006 --id 1007 --id 1008 --id 1009 --id 1010 --id 1011 --id 1012 --id 1013 --id 1014 --id 1015 --id 1016 --id 1017 --id 1018 --id 1019 --id 1020 --id 1021 --id 1022 --id 1023 --id 1024 --id 1025 --id 1026 --id 1027 --id 1028 --id 1029 --id 1030 --id 1031 --id 1032 --id 1033 --id 1034 --id 1035 --ctab-default sysname Darwin hostname ypatel-BYOD.local machine x86_64 user ypatel UseRobust 0 Constructing seg from annotation Reading annotation /Users/ypatel/Documents/brno/661A.long.024ns/label/lh.aparc.annot reading colortable from annotation file... colortable with 36 entries read (originally /autofs/space/tanha_002/users/greve/fsdev.build/average/colortable_desikan_killiany.txt) Seg base 1000 CTABwriteFileASCII(/tmp/mri_segstats.tmp.brno/661A.long.024ns.lh.15.ctab): could not open for writing No such file or directory CTABreadASCII(/tmp/mri_segstats.tmp.brno/661A.long.024ns.lh.15.ctab): could not open file No such file or directory ERROR: reading /tmp/mri_segstats.tmp.brno/661A.long.024ns.lh.15.ctab Interestingly, I ran the SAME code a few weeks ago, and everything worked fine. Somehow something has changed. I also made sure I have permission to /tmp Please let me know if you guys have a suggestion, Thank you Yash

2 4

Fwd: Freeview update on Mac
by Sarah Cole 28 Feb '18

28 Feb '18

Great! Thank you so much, Andrew. I downloaded the updated Freeview. I am still wondering how to draw an ROI on the surface in Freeview. I don't have the options. Could you please let me know what command you are running to get the Freeview? I am having the updated version Jan 2018. Thanks, Sarah On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Hoopes, Andrew <AHOOPES(a)mgh.harvard.edu> wrote: > Hi Sarah, I updated the wiki page. We actually just put up a standalone, > dev freeview app today. > > best > Andrew > > > On February 27, 2018 at 11:38:57 AM, Sarah Cole (coleashley00(a)gmail.com) > wrote: > > Hi Doug/Zeke, > > Could you please update the page for freeview update on Mac- if it is > available. > > https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/UpdateFreeview > > > Thanks, > > S > _______________________________________________ > 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. >

2 1

Resolution limits of FLAIR/T2w for effective pial refinement
by Christopher Markiewicz 28 Feb '18

28 Feb '18

Hi all, I wonder if people have any data (or anecdotes - I'm not picky) with regard to how high of resolution T2w or FLAIR images need to be in order to be useful for FreeSurfer's pial refinement. I've seen a couple threads suggesting the optimal is ~1mm isotropic, and that thick slice (1x1x5 mm^3) FLAIR images could be tried, but might hurt more than help, and I'm wondering if there's a suboptimal-but-still-useful range somewhere in between. For the record, this isn't a question of what scan parameters are recommended, but rather is in the context of data that's already been collected, which I would like to preprocess as well as possible. So, at what resolutions would you recommend (a) completely ignoring T2w/FLAIR images; (b) including T2w/FLAIR images that pass QC; (c) trying and seeing? Do these answers change at all with T1w resolution? -- Chris Markiewicz Center for Reproducible Neuroscience Stanford University

3 2

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