Hi,
what's the reason that FS's default surface for measuring surface area is the white matter surface and not the pial surface? why isn't surface area measured on the intermediate surface (average of gray.and white which should be less biased by sulci and gyri, i think)?
thanks, -joost
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Michael Harms mharms@conte.wustl.edu wrote:
Hi Massieh, There were some posts related to this a while back. If I recall correctly, the vertex-wise area measure (and likewise the vertex-wise volume measure) is highly dependent on the local mesh triangulation, and thus is not really a meaningful variable from a biological perspective. So, you would be better off analyzing the area of a whole label. Best, -Mike H. On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 09:54 -0400, Massieh Moayedi wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I had two questions: > > 1) I was wondering if it's ok to run a glm to compare cortical surface > areas between two groups on a vertex-wide basis (just like a thickness > analysis). Or is it better to extract the area of a label (as is the > output of mri_anatomical_stats)? > > 2) The mri_anatomical_stats output includes 4 measures of curvature: > MeanCurv, GausCurv, Van Essen Folding index and Curvature Index. There > was some discussion as to which of these was most appropriate for > comparing sulcal folding (that is, essentially what they measure, > correct?)- was there ever any final consensus? > > Thank you. > > Regards, > > Massieh Moayedi B.Sc. (Hons) > PhD Student > Dr. Karen Davis' Lab > Institute of Medical Science > University of Toronto > > Brain, Imaging and Behaviour- Systems Neuroscience > MP 14-301 > Toronto Western Research Institute > University Health Network > 399 Bathurst Street > Toronto, Ontario > Canada M5T 2S8 > Tel: 416-603-5882 > > massih.moayedi@utoronto.ca > mmoayedi@uhnres.utoronto.ca > http://individual.utoronto.ca/PSMJC > > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > 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. _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
Hi Joost,
we provide both so you can have the flexibility to do what you want with them. The naming conventions are for historical reasons (we had a white matter representation before we had a pial one).
cheers Bruce
On Thu, 29 Apr 2010, j janssen wrote:
Hi,
what's the reason that FS's default surface for measuring surface area is the white matter surface and not the pial surface? why isn't surface area measured on the intermediate surface (average of gray.and white which should be less biased by sulci and gyri, i think)?
thanks, -joost
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Michael Harms mharms@conte.wustl.edu wrote:
Hi Massieh, There were some posts related to this a while back. If I recall correctly, the vertex-wise area measure (and likewise the vertex-wise volume measure) is highly dependent on the local mesh triangulation, and thus is not really a meaningful variable from a biological perspective. So, you would be better off analyzing the area of a whole label. Best, -Mike H. On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 09:54 -0400, Massieh Moayedi wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I had two questions: > > 1) I was wondering if it's ok to run a glm to compare cortical surface > areas between two groups on a vertex-wide basis (just like a thickness > analysis). Or is it better to extract the area of a label (as is the > output of mri_anatomical_stats)? > > 2) The mri_anatomical_stats output includes 4 measures of curvature: > MeanCurv, GausCurv, Van Essen Folding index and Curvature Index. There > was some discussion as to which of these was most appropriate for > comparing sulcal folding (that is, essentially what they measure, > correct?)- was there ever any final consensus? > > Thank you. > > Regards, > > Massieh Moayedi B.Sc. (Hons) > PhD Student > Dr. Karen Davis' Lab > Institute of Medical Science > University of Toronto > > Brain, Imaging and Behaviour- Systems Neuroscience > MP 14-301 > Toronto Western Research Institute > University Health Network > 399 Bathurst Street > Toronto, Ontario > Canada M5T 2S8 > Tel: 416-603-5882 > > massih.moayedi@utoronto.ca > mmoayedi@uhnres.utoronto.ca > http://individual.utoronto.ca/PSMJC > > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > 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. _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu