Hi Tristan,

As you know, the target keeps moving.  If you haven't done so, read this paper:

http://cercor.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/11/02/cercor.bhr290.long

It's been a while since I read it, and I noticed one of the sumsdb links was 
bad, but this looks like the right thing:

http://sumsdb.wustl.edu/sums/directory.do?id=8286148&dir_name=MACAQUE_ATLAS_CC11

This won't answer all your questions, but it might buy me more time, until I 
get caught up. ;-)

Donna


On Feb 17, 2012, at 12:09 AM, Tristan Chaplin wrote:

> Thanks for information, but I must confess I don't understand why you create 
> the sphere first.  I thought the procedure for atlases was to make a surface, 
> then resample it as a standard mesh, then do spherical morphing etc.  Is the 
> idea instead to create the fiducial surface, do spherical morphing, then 
> align the sphere to one of these standard spheres?
> 
> FYI we've already made a fiducial surface with cytoarchitecure as paint.
> 
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 16:08, Timothy Coalson <[email protected]> wrote:
> We have moved away from the 73730 mesh, we are now using a new method to 
> generate meshes which results in much more regular node spacing.  Making a 
> sphere is actually relatively easy, especially with the new release of caret. 
>  The hard part is making it into an atlas, which I defer to someone else.  
> The command:
> 
> caret_command -surface-create-spheres
> 
> Will generate a pair of matched left/right spheres (mirror node 
> correspondence, topologies with normals oriented out).  I think that command 
> made it into the 5.65 release, if not you can use spec file change 
> resolution, and grab just the new sphere, and ditch the rest.  The odd bit 
> about spec file change resolution, though, is if you give it an old node 
> count, like 73730, it will give you the old sphere (this is in case someone 
> is relying on its old behavior).  However, ask it for 73731 nodes, and you 
> will get a new highly regular sphere instead (though it won't have 73730 
> nodes, because the 73730 node mesh wasn't a regularly divided geodesic 
> sphere, but it will give you something close).  If all else fails, there are 
> a few spheres in the caret data directory.
> 
> Tim
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Tristan Chaplin <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> A while back I asked about creating standard mesh of 73,730 nodes, similar to 
> what is used for PALS atlas.  I never got a chance to follow it up then but 
> I'd like to give it a go now.  It seemed at the time that the knowledge for 
> creating such meshes was limited to a select few so if anyone has any 
> experience with this or has the contact details of someone I would greatly 
> appreciate hearing from them.
> 
> The reason for creating this mesh is for making atlas for the marmoset 
> monkey.  We are very interested registering this atlas to the macaque monkey 
> and doing analyses similar to Hill et al. (2010).
> 
> Thanks,
> Tristan Chaplin
> 
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 16:04, Tristan Chaplin <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> Ok thanks for the information.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 03:25, Donna Dierker <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 02/01/2011 07:31 PM, Tristan Chaplin wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been reading about the creation of your atlases, and I see that
> > PALS and the macaque atlases have standard size mesh of 73,730 nodes.
> >  I was wondering, is this the same across species to allow
> > interspecies registration?  i.e. is it still possible to do
> > interspecies comparisons of other species with different size meshes?
> Possible, but more difficult.  Not to say that achieving vertex
> correspondence across species is trivial.  Interspecies comparisons are
> really hard.  I think David Van Essen is the only one in our lab that is
> doing them, although Matt Glasser might also be doing some.
> >
> > I was also wondering how the standard mesh was was actually made.  The
> > PALS paper refers to the Saad 2004 paper, which I think uses SUMA.
> >  SUMA has a program called MapIcosahedron to create standard meshes.
> >  Is this still how you would recommend making a standard mesh?
> Tim Coalson (a student who works summers here) also developed a utility
> that creates meshes of specified resolution.
> 
> Making a standard mesh is not something I ever do.  You do it with a
> specific motivation -- typically some other important data is already
> available on that mesh.  And the way you usually get your data on that
> mesh is to register it to an atlas target already on that mesh.
> 
> If you are talking about creating, say, a sparser mesh for mice/rats,
> then you're out of my orbit.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Tristan
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > caret-users mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> caret-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> caret-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> caret-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> caret-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users


_______________________________________________
caret-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://brainvis.wustl.edu/mailman/listinfo/caret-users

Reply via email to