Hi Victor, Being 2 separate atlases, this can happen. Maybe I should build a joint hipo/amygdala/thalamic atlas to prevent this from happening (this is why have the hippo and amygdala in the same atlas, in first place). Regarding this particular subject: if the overlap is the reflection of poor segmentation quality, then you can QC reject it. But if they look OK independently, it’s probably fine to use it. Cheers, /E

Juan Eugenio Iglesias Senior research fellow CMIC (UCL), MGH (HMS) and CSAIL (MIT) http://www.jeiglesias.com

On May 24, 2021, at 14:15, Zeng, Victor (BIDMC - Keshavan - Psychiatry) <vzeng@bidmc.harvard.edumailto:vzeng@bidmc.harvard.edu> wrote:

​Hi,

I am visually quality checking the hippocampal and the thalamic subnuclei parcellations that Iglesias designed. I see that the hippocampal tail and the PuM (pulvinar) overlay with each other. What should I make of that? Is that a brain worth removing from analysis?

Victor Zeng Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Keshavan Lab --

________________________________

This message is intended for the use of the person(s) to whom it may be addressed. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution, copying, or use of this information is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please permanently delete it and immediately notify the sender. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edumailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer