Freesurfer

freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu

17 participants
30099 discussions

Re: [Freesurfer] unit of each index (thickness, volume, sulc, curv) after mri_glmfit-sim
by wang kangcheng 18 Jul '14

18 Jul '14

Thanks doug I first merge the data using command of mris_preproc and then do the GLM analysis using command of mri_glmfit. After that, using the following command to look the result: mri_surfcluster --in leg.volume.lh.10/g2v2/sig.mgh --csd /usr/local/freesurfer/average/mult-comp-cor/fsaverage/lh/cortex/fwhm15/pos/th13/mc-z.csd --mask leg.volume.lh.10/mask.mgh --cwsig leg.volume.lh.10/g2v2/cache.th13.pos.sig.cluster.mgh --vwsig leg.volume.lh.10/g2v2/cache.th13.pos.sig.voxel.mgh --sum leg.volume.lh.10/g2v2/cache.th13.pos.sig.cluster.summary --ocn leg.volume.lh.10/g2v2/cache.th13.pos.sig.ocn.mgh --oannot leg.volume.lh.10/g2v2/cache.th13.pos.sig.ocn.annot --annot aparc --csdpdf leg.volume.lh.10/g2v2/cache.th13.pos.pdf.dat --cwpvalthresh 1 --o leg.volume.lh.10/g2v2/cache.th13.pos.sig.masked.mgh --no-fixmni --bonferroni 2 --surf white Did you mean that I multiple the value by the number of vertices (NVtxs, which in the file of cache.th13.pos.sig.cluster.summary ) to get the total volume for the cluster? # ClusterNo Max VtxMax Size(mm^2) MNIX MNIY MNIZ CWP CWPLow CWPHi NVtxs Annot 1 4.623 7401 1647.03 -8.8 -49.3 5.4 0.00719 0.00559 0.00878 4199 isthmuscingulate 2 3.984 46872 1185.43 -7.7 -71.9 50.4 0.06375 0.05929 0.06820 2487 precuneus 3 3.960 57039 3597.23 -10.6 64.4 -5.0 0.00020 0.00000 0.00040 5545 frontalpole Wang Kangcheng Faculty of Psychology, Southwest University, China Email: kangchengwang0808(a)gmail.com / wangkangcheng.001(a)163.com Address: No.2 Tiansheng Road, BeiBei District, Chongqing, 400715,P.R.China

1 0

Re: [Freesurfer] unit of each index (thickness, volume, sulc, curv) after mri_glmfit-sim
by wang kangcheng 18 Jul '14

18 Jul '14

Thank you doug Data of thickness: 1.83629 3.01648 2.16078 corresponds to lateraloccipital, frontalpole and superiorparietal. Why the number of volume (e.g 1.39463 1.50616 2.53250) was also so small ? was the unit cm^3? Wang Kangcheng

2 1

unit of each index (thickness, volume, sulc, curv) after mri_glmfit-sim
by wang kangcheng 17 Jul '14

17 Jul '14

Dear freesurfer experts After using the command of mri_glmfit-sim (mri_glmfit-sim --glmdir aaa.thickness(or thickness, volume, sulc, curv ).lh.10 --cache 1.3 pos --cwp 1 --2spaces). I check the data in the fie of cache.th13.pos.y.ocn.dat and found that the data of volume was so small ( e.g 1.39463 1.50616 2.53250).Data of thickness was same as volume (e.g 1.83629 3.01648 2.16078). Could you tell the unit of each index? And could the data be used as further analysis, e.g correlation with IQ or other behaviors? Thank you Wang kangcheng

2 1

template replacement
by Ilwoo Lyu 17 Jul '14

17 Jul '14

Dear FS experts, I am trying to adapt a macaque template (dim: 250 by 300 by 300, voxel size: 0.8202 mm). I changed voxel spacing and dimensions to be the same as the MNI305 template in freesurfer, but it seems not to work correctly for the affine transformation in the Talairach space. Here are my questions: 1) Should I change the voxel size and dimensions of the macaque template? 2) Should I change the original coordinate system of the macaque template into the Talairach space? If so, how can I do that (eg, roughly aligned to (or registration) the MNI template)? Thank you! Ilwoo

1 0

Re: [Freesurfer] Temporal lobe reconstruction problem
by james pardon 17 Jul '14

17 Jul '14

Hi Louis, I would appreciate if I could get your feedback on this specific subject we are experiencing problems with. Thanks James On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Bruce Fischl <fischl(a)nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote: > Hi James > > I did, and one of our RAs here is going to be looking into it. Louis (ccd) > can give you more information > > cheers > Bruce > > On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, james pardon wrote: > > Hi Bruce, >> I was wondering whether you have seen my email below? >> >> Thanks so much >> >> Cheers, >> James >> >> >> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 9:18 AM, james pardon <james.pardon15(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> Hi Bruce, >> I have sent the link for a problem subject via a private >> message. Please note since MS causes hypointense lesions in white >> matter I have used an algorithm that fills hypointense lesions in WM >> with median intensity of normal appearing WM. >> >> Thanks >> James >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:19 PM, Bruce Fischl >> <fischl(a)nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote: >> Hi James >> >> if you upload a problem subject we will take a look (the >> whole subject dir please) >> cheers >> Bruce >> On Fri, 11 Jul 2014, james pardon wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> On a few subjects with a specific pathology >> (MS) I cannot easily reconstruct temporal >> lobes. >> I think this issue comes up quite regularly on >> the mailing list, and I have tried to trouble >> shoot using control points, WM edits, even >> getting back to orig/001.mgz to correct areas >> that >> may seem the culprit for breaking surface >> reconstruction. Some subjects have gone >> through 7-8 >> runs of recon-all with different edits but >> still the problem persists in a few subjects >> in my >> study. >> >> I have also tried to use -mprage and -3T flags >> along the way to allow more liberal control >> point growing, despite an improvement in my >> results some of subjects still have very bad >> surface constructions. I have attached two >> snapshots to this email and I am happy to >> upload >> the complete subject folder if you need to >> take a look at them. >> >> As far as the SNR is concerned, I have >> designed my study based on recommended >> Freesurfer >> parameters a couple of years ago on 3T Siemens >> Trio with 32-channel receiver coil. >> >> A huge thank you for your previous helps, and >> thanks in advance for helping me with this new >> issue. >> >> James >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 2

why the size become larger after fdr correction
by wang kangcheng 17 Jul '14

17 Jul '14

Dear experts I use the following command and the Size(mm^2) was28.65. mri_surfcluster --in leg.volume.lh.20/g2v2/sig.mgh --thmin 3.7190 --no-adjust --sign abs --subject fsaverage --hemi lh --annot aparc.a2009s --mask leg.volume.lh.20/mask.mgh --sum leg.volume.lh.20/g2v2/sig.z3.7190.txt # ClusterNo Max VtxMax Size(mm^2) TalX TalY TalZ NVtxs Annot 1 4.068 160031 28.65 -7.5 -42.6 9.2 87 G_cingul-Post-ventral However, When I used the FDR correction and found that size become larger (76467.08). mri_surfcluster --in leg.volume.lh.20/g2v2/sig.mgh --fdr 2.3 --no-adjust --sign abs --subject fsaverage --hemi lh --annot aparc.a2009s --mask leg.volume.lh.20/mask.mgh --cwsig 5 --sum fdr.2.3.txt # ClusterNo Max VtxMax Size(mm^2) TalX TalY TalZ NVtxs Annot 1 4.068 160031 76467.08 -7.5 -42.6 9.2 149953 G_cingul-Post-ventral Why the size become larger ? Or is there some problem? Thank you

2 1

Polar angle wedge default position
by Jackie Lam 17 Jul '14

17 Jul '14

Thanks Doug. I assume that Freesurfer begins with 0 and proceeds to positive values if one specifies “counterclockwise” in the rtopy.par file, and if one chooses “clockwise” I assume Freesurfer starts with 0 and proceeds to negative values. Is that right? >On 07/16/2014 04:29 PM, Jackie Lam wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> In Freesurfer’s analysis of retinotopy data, what is the phase assigned by freesurfer to the very beginning of the > stimulation paradigm? >> I would assume that it should be 0, but it would be good to verify. > Yes, 0. > Then, how do the phases proceed after the beginning? To negative values or positive values? > positive >> >> In general, which phase values are assigned to a full cycle of the stimulation paradigm (start, 1/4cycle, 1/2 cycle and 3/4 cycle)? > I don't understand what you mean > doug >> >> Thanks >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Freesurfer mailing list >> Freesurfer at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu >> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer >> >> > > -- > Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D. > MGH-NMR Center > > greve at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > > Phone Number: 617-724-2358 > Fax: 617-726-7422

1 0

Can't Remove WM
by Weber, Wade (weberw) 17 Jul '14

17 Jul '14

Hi Surfers, I am running recon-all on some subjects and have run into a strange problem. When we go back to look at the WM voxels for editing, the wm.mgz layer has a light blue tint over the whole layer. When we try to edit the WM voxels, we can add , but we cannot delete any WM voxels. Also, all the WM voxels show up as yellow instead of red as we have set them to show up as red. We tried deleting all the FS files and re-doing the recon-all, but it still shows up like this. This has only happened on 3 or 4 subjects out of about 50. I've attached a picture of our problem Thanks in advance! Wade Weber, MS Clinical Research Manager Division of Bipolar Disorder Research Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience University of Cincinnati

2 1

qdec error
by Anna Jonsson 17 Jul '14

17 Jul '14

Dear group, I now have error loading my qdec table into qdec, for this error fsid column: 1 Number of factors: 8 Number of subjects: 168 ERROR: QdecSubject::GetContinuousFactor failure: could not find factor name: age_demeaned for subject XXX However those 5 of those "factors" are continious, and Im assuming the problem is that for some reason qdec thinks they are categorical, and should have a file with levels corresponding to them. How I make freesurfer know they are continuous? Kind Wishes, Linn

1 1

Re: [Freesurfer] How to extract significant result for each subject
by wang kangcheng 17 Jul '14

17 Jul '14

Dear Douglas I try the analysis of volume and other indexes, not just thickness. I was confused that why the data of volume for each subject was so small (data in the file of cache.th13.pos.y.ocn.dat, e.g 1.39463 1.50616 2.53250) after using the command of mri_glmfit-sim (mri_glmfit-sim --glmdir aaa.thickness(or volume, sulc).lh.10 --cache 1.3 pos --cwp 1 --2spaces). Could you tell me the unit for each index (e.g thickness, volume, sulc,pial_lgi)? Thank you

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