AFNI Message Board

Dear AFNI users-

We are very pleased to announce that the new AFNI Message Board framework is up! Please join us at:

https://discuss.afni.nimh.nih.gov

Existing user accounts have been migrated, so returning users can login by requesting a password reset. New users can create accounts, as well, through a standard account creation process. Please note that these setup emails might initially go to spam folders (esp. for NIH users!), so please check those locations in the beginning.

The current Message Board discussion threads have been migrated to the new framework. The current Message Board will remain visible, but read-only, for a little while.

Sincerely, AFNI HQ

History of AFNI updates  

|
Oori
October 29, 2005 10:24PM

Hello, I am conducting a group analysis on brains that have been
Freesurfed (including parcelation), and then processed in SUMA
following the guidelines under " Surface-Based Cross-Subject Analysis"
in the manual.

I have created the standard-mesh surfaces for each subject using the
MapIcosahedron. Now I would like to take the information stored in the
output of each subject's Freesurfer ROI parcellation (?h.aparc.annot) so that I could use that information for statistical analyses on the surface. That is, my goal is to generate a suma-readable "dset" in which each vertex in the
standard-mesh space (the output of MapIcosahedron) would be annotated with a number that represents the ROI the vertex belongs to (grabbed from Freesurfer's parcellation).

I first generated a text file from the binary “.annot” file using FSread_annot –roi_1D
That text file marks, for each vertex, the ROI identifier that the vertex belongs to in the parcellation scheme. This is the information I would like to import to the SUMA domain, and this processes is not working as I thought.

Given that the original space has 132394 vertexes, and the
standard-mesh has 196002, I want to use the most precise
interpolation method.
I have used SurfToSurf with a command line such as this:

SurfToSurf \
-i_fs $subj_$hemi_mesh140_std.smoothwm.asc \
-i_fs $subj_$hemi.smoothwm.asc \
-output_params Data \
-data FSread.output\[1]

where Fsread.output\[1] points to the column that holds the ROI identifiers for the vertexes.

The results seem OK, in general. However, in SurfToSurf, when the “data” is mapped from one surface to the other (in this case, the “data” are integers standing for ROI identifiers) some of the values change due to the interpolation (i.e., the ROI identifiers sometimes become numbers such as 54.16 etc’ rather than INTs).

I tried overcoming this by using the “NearestNode” option in the SurfToSurf command line, (which I thought would disable the interpolation) but the outcome is exactly the same as in the above example.

Any ideas – much appreciated.


Thanks,

Oori
Subject Author Posted

Freesurfer ROI annotation --> SUMA standard-mesh (Icosahedron) representation

Oori October 29, 2005 10:24PM

Re: Freesurfer ROI annotation --> SUMA standard-mesh (Icosahedron) representation

ziad Saad October 30, 2005 11:35PM

Re: Freesurfer ROI annotation --> SUMA standard-mesh (Icosahedron) representation

Oori October 31, 2005 08:42AM

Re: Freesurfer ROI annotation --> SUMA standard-mesh (Icosahedron) representation

Ziad Saad October 31, 2005 02:30PM

Re: Freesurfer ROI annotation --> SUMA standard-mesh (Icosahedron) representation

Oori October 31, 2005 03:10PM

Re: Freesurfer ROI annotation --> SUMA standard-mesh (Icosahedron) representation

Ziad Saad November 01, 2005 01:12PM