Hi Ziad,

thanks for getting back to me. The reasoning behind my ROI query was that we load functionally-defined, bonified SUMA ROIs into Matlab as part of our EEG source localization pipeline. We recently started using a separate set of anatomically defined ROIs, that are defined not as bonafide SUMA ROIs, but as niml.dset file where the vertices belonging to each ROI are assigned different integers. It would be nice to be able to use the same procedure for all of our ROIs, so I was looking to convert the dset ROIs to bonafide SUMA ROIs. I think I have come up with a reasonable solution on the Matlab side, but I would be interested in hearing more about how to compute surface ROIs (bonafide or not) based on thresholded surface maps automatically, rather than just drawing them manually.

The color map thing works great - thanks!

I have another SUMA-question: I have analyzed a functional dataset using afni_proc, and used SurfAnat+orig from each subject's SUMA folder as the anatomical dataset. I make afni_proc align the anatomical to the EPIs, rather than the other way around, because I want to manipulate my EPIs as little as possible. It works fine, everything is well-aligned and my data seems to make sense. Now I want to map the data onto the surface: Do I need to use @SUMA_AlignToExperiment to make a version of the SurfAnat dataset that is aligned to my experiment, or can I simply use the aligned SurfAnat+orig generated by afni_proc.py (anat_final)? I think the latter is the case, because when I run afni and suma with anat_final as my surface volume, everything appears to line up. Similarly, when I run 3dVol2Surf with anat_final as the surface volume, my data appears to be mapped onto the surface in a reasonable way. Can you confirm that @SUMA_AlignToExperiment is not necessary in this specific case?