Sorry, but now I'm confused: I thought you confirmed that the HCP task fMRI pipelines perform motion correction and spatial normalization (MNI atlas registration) on the task fMRI images in volume space, before mapping the data to the surface. Doesn't that mean that the surface version of the task fMRI data relies upon the volumetric atlas registration, and is so a different procedure than the spherical registration to atlas space described in Anticevic et al., 2008?
thanks, Jo On 4/24/2015 11:24 AM, Glasser, Matthew wrote: > There were a few threads on this in the past. The volume and surface > registration are pretty much independent. The cortical data are aligned > with surface registration. > > Peace, > > Matt. > > From: Timothy Coalson <tsc...@mst.edu <mailto:tsc...@mst.edu>> > Date: Friday, April 24, 2015 at 10:55 AM > To: "J.A. Etzel" <jet...@artsci.wustl.edu <mailto:jet...@artsci.wustl.edu>> > Cc: Matt Glasser <glass...@wusm.wustl.edu > <mailto:glass...@wusm.wustl.edu>>, "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org > <mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" <hcp-users@humanconnectome.org > <mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> > Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] MNI atlas registration in volume space for task > fMRI grayordinates datasets? > > You can't do surface registration before you have data on the surface to > register with, which is what the volume to surface mapping does. We do > use surface registration, and we highly recommend its use to everyone, > but volume registration is still an important preceding step - they are > not mutually exclusive. > > Tim > > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:48 AM, J.A. Etzel <jet...@artsci.wustl.edu > <mailto:jet...@artsci.wustl.edu>> wrote: > > Thanks for the quick reply. > > Why was this chosen, as opposed to surface-based registration, such as > described in Anticevic et al. 2008 > (doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.02.052)? Have you done comparisons > suggesting that volume-based registration is preferable? > > thanks again, > Jo > > > On 4/24/2015 9:59 AM, Glasser, Matthew wrote: > > Yes that¹s how it works. > > > > Peace, > > > > Matt. > > > > On 4/24/15, 9:56 AM, "J.A. Etzel" <jet...@artsci.wustl.edu > <mailto:jet...@artsci.wustl.edu>> wrote: > > > >> I have a question about the preprocessing for the task-fMRI > >> grayordinates datasets, specifically the images from the Level 2 > >> fixed-effects analysis. For clarity, the images I'm asking about are > >> those like > >> > /104820/MNINonLinear/Results/tfMRI_WM/tfMRI_WM_hp200_s4_level2.feat/Grayor > >> dinatesStats/cope2.feat/pe1.dtseries.nii > >> > >> From Barch et al. (2013) and the HCP_S500 Reference Manual, these > >> participant-level analyses were performed with a grayordinates-adapted > >> version of the FSL Level 1 and Level 2 analysis routines, using as > input > >> the output of the fMRISurface pipeline. > >> > >> Which brings me to the question: Is it correct that the pipelines > >> producing these images perform (amongst other preprocessing steps) > >> motion correction and spatial normalization (MNI atlas registration) on > >> the fMRI images in volume space, before the surface mapping? Figures 19 > >> and 20 in Glasser et al. (2013) suggest that this is the case, but it > is > >> a bit unclear. > >> > >> thanks, > >> Jo > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Joset A. Etzel, Ph.D. > >> Research Analyst > >> Cognitive Control & Psychopathology Lab > >> Washington University in St. Louis > >>http://mvpa.blogspot.com/ > >> _______________________________________________ > >> HCP-Users mailing list > >>HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org <mailto:HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org> > >>http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users _______________________________________________ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users
