Dear FS experts,
first I would like to thank you for the very nice perirhinal cortex ex-vivo label you provide in your latest releases!
My question concerns the relationship between the ?h.perirhinal.label and the ?h.entorhinal_exvivo.label. Going over some brains in our data set, it looks to me that these two labels have some degree of overlap which often occupies the lateralmost ~1-2 mm of the parahippocampal gyrus crown and ~1-2 mm of the collateral sulcus medial wall, depending on the y-level and the brain. As I understand, these labels (unlike e.g. the labels in the aparc.annot) were created independently from one another thus allowing such overlap. I appreciate that given the transitional nature of the BA35, one would not expect to see a clear border between the two cytoarchitectonic areas. Still, I would like to inquire whether you have any information on which label is 'more reliable' and whether you have any insights as to how to best go about resolving this ambiguity?
Thank you for your help in advance!
Best, Sasa
Hi Sasa
do the thresholded labels also overlap? I guess they might, but I would expect far less. They are probabilistic, so unless our estimates were perfect they pretty much have to overlap. It would be easy enough to combine them and prohibit overlap by picking the one with the higher probability at each vertex.
cheers Bruce On Fri, 14 Jun 2013, Sasa Kivisaari wrote:
Dear FS experts,
first I would like to thank you for the very nice perirhinal cortex ex-vivo label you provide in your latest releases!
My question concerns the relationship between the ?h.perirhinal.label and the ?h.entorhinal_exvivo.label. Going over some brains in our data set, it looks to me that these two labels have some degree of overlap which often occupies the lateralmost ~1-2 mm of the parahippocampal gyrus crown and ~1-2 mm of the collateral sulcus medial wall, depending on the y-level and the brain. As I understand, these labels (unlike e.g. the labels in the aparc.annot) were created independently from one another thus allowing such overlap. I appreciate that given the transitional nature of the BA35, one would not expect to see a clear border between the two cytoarchitectonic areas. Still, I would like to inquire whether you have any information on which label is 'more reliable' and whether you have any insights as to how to best go about resolving this ambiguity?
Thank you for your help in advance!
Best, Sasa
Hi Bruce,
thanks for your very helpful reply! I wonder if there is a tool in freesurfer for assigning vertices to labels the way you describe?
Best, Sasa
On 14 Jun 2013, at 20:57, Bruce Fischl wrote:
Hi Sasa
do the thresholded labels also overlap? I guess they might, but I would expect far less. They are probabilistic, so unless our estimates were perfect they pretty much have to overlap. It would be easy enough to combine them and prohibit overlap by picking the one with the higher probability at each vertex.
cheers Bruce On Fri, 14 Jun 2013, Sasa Kivisaari wrote:
Dear FS experts,
first I would like to thank you for the very nice perirhinal cortex ex-vivo label you provide in your latest releases!
My question concerns the relationship between the ?h.perirhinal.label and the ?h.entorhinal_exvivo.label. Going over some brains in our data set, it looks to me that these two labels have some degree of overlap which often occupies the lateralmost ~1-2 mm of the parahippocampal gyrus crown and ~1-2 mm of the collateral sulcus medial wall, depending on the y-level and the brain. As I understand, these labels (unlike e.g. the labels in the aparc.annot) were created independently from one another thus allowing such overlap. I appreciate that given the transitional nature of the BA35, one would not expect to see a clear border between the two cytoarchitectonic areas. Still, I would like to inquire whether you have any information on which label is 'more reliable' and whether you have any insights as to how to best go about resolving this ambiguity?
Thank you for your help in advance!
Best, Sasa
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.
I don't think so, but it would be pretty easy to write. We'll add it to the list On Fri, 14 Jun 2013, Sasa Kivisaari wrote:
Hi Bruce,
thanks for your very helpful reply! I wonder if there is a tool in freesurfer for assigning vertices to labels the way you describe?
Best, Sasa
On 14 Jun 2013, at 20:57, Bruce Fischl wrote:
Hi Sasa
do the thresholded labels also overlap? I guess they might, but I would expect far less. They are probabilistic, so unless our estimates were perfect they pretty much have to overlap. It would be easy enough to combine them and prohibit overlap by picking the one with the higher probability at each vertex.
cheers Bruce On Fri, 14 Jun 2013, Sasa Kivisaari wrote:
Dear FS experts,
first I would like to thank you for the very nice perirhinal cortex ex-vivo label you provide in your latest releases!
My question concerns the relationship between the ?h.perirhinal.label and the ?h.entorhinal_exvivo.label. Going over some brains in our data set, it looks to me that these two labels have some degree of overlap which often occupies the lateralmost ~1-2 mm of the parahippocampal gyrus crown and ~1-2 mm of the collateral sulcus medial wall, depending on the y-level and the brain. As I understand, these labels (unlike e.g. the labels in the aparc.annot) were created independently from one another thus allowing such overlap. I appreciate that given the transitional nature of the BA35, one would not expect to see a clear border between the two cytoarchitectonic areas. Still, I would like to inquire whether you have any information on which label is 'more reliable' and whether you have any insights as to how to best go about resolving this ambiguity?
Thank you for your help in advance!
Best, Sasa
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@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
-
Bruce Fischl -
Sasa Kivisaari