External Email - Use Caution Hey Doug,
thanks so much for your answer! Do you mean the "Max" column? This is the only one that changes signs in all my results. I used abs in the analyses. So if the order in my FSGD file is subjects of the groups ADHD, Comorbid and Typically developing; my contras matrix looks like this: 1 0 -1 and the output for e.g. volume is this: ClusterNo Max VtxMax Size(mm^2) MNIX MNIY MNIZ CWP CWPLow CWPHi NVtxs Annot 1 -3.086 143615 165.54 34.0 -10.4 -34.8 0.84806 0.84310 0.85285 273 fusiform ... does this mean there is decreased volume in the ADHD group compared to the typically developing group? Am I interpreting it right? Best Lea ------------------------------ Lea Backhausen Research Assistant Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine of the TU Dresden, Germany http://www.uniklinikum-dresden.de -----Original Message----- From: freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> On Behalf Of freesurfer-requ...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2018 6:00 PM To: freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Freesurfer Digest, Vol 178, Issue 7 Send Freesurfer mailing list submissions to freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to freesurfer-requ...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu You can reach the person managing the list at freesurfer-ow...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Freesurfer digest..." Today's Topics: 1. visual cortex {Disarmed} (???) 2. Longitudinal processing and paralllel flag (Erik O'Hanlon) 3. Re: visual cortex {Disarmed} (Bruce Fischl) 4. Re: [PETsurfer] Use of MGX and RBV partial volume correction (Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D.) 5. Re: Fwd: Overall maxima is high and still no significant cluster (Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D.) 6. Re: mris_preproc paired diff outputs 0 values (Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D.) 7. fsaverage6 FS6 (Sanfelici, Rachele) 8. Re: Direction of significant group comparison (Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D.) 9. Re: Extracting ROI from atlases (Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 16:58:32 +0800 (GMT+08:00) From: ??? <zhengfenglian0...@163.com> Subject: [Freesurfer] visual cortex {Disarmed} To: "Freesurfer support list" <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <1cd7a499.10465.16782bd7046.coremail.zhengfenglian0...@163.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk" External Email - Use Caution Hi experts, I want to do some research on the cortical thickness of visual cortex using FS 6.0. Is there specified or associated cortex model for the segmentation of visual cortex? Thanks for your reply in advance. I need your help. Sincerely, Zheng | | ??? | | ???zhengfenglian0...@163.com | ??? ?????? ?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/pipermail/freesurfer/attachments/20181206/8521f982/attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 11:07:21 +0000 From: "Erik O'Hanlon" <erikohan...@rcsi.ie> Subject: [Freesurfer] Longitudinal processing and paralllel flag To: Freesurfer support list <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <db7pr07mb5419dc5437dd66fc891c40f7a3...@db7pr07mb5419.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" External Email - Use Caution Hi FS experts, I'm running a longitudinal process with three time points per subject and was wondering if you can advise on the typical time to process? Can the -parallel flag be added to the base and long steps? I'm running this on a cluster that has 16 core nodes with 32gigs of ram so it might give me a good tme saving if these steps can be parallelized. Thanks and regards Erik Postdoctoral Research Fellow Dept. Of Psychiatry Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland ERC Building Beaumont Hospital Dublin & Dept. Of Psychiatry Trinity College Institute of Neuroscience The Llyod Institute Trinity College Dublin D2 Erik O'Hanlon Postdoctoral researcher [cid:rcsi-crest-signature_f581c185-1d03-45c8-a786-23d8ece3d391.png] RCSI Psychiatry Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland Beaumont Road, Beaumont D9 Ireland T: 8093740 E: erikohan...@rcsi.ie W: www.rcsi.com<http://www.rcsi.com/> Transforming Healthcare Education, Research and Service: RCSI Strategic Plan 2018-2022<http://www.rcsi.ie/strategy2018> [cid:AS_BRONZE_IIDD_65c26b0a-ea45-42c8-956e-5d84e884e4e6.png] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/pipermail/freesurfer/attachments/20181206/ba5363e8/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: rcsi-crest-signature_f581c185-1d03-45c8-a786-23d8ece3d391.png Type: image/png Size: 8772 bytes Desc: rcsi-crest-signature_f581c185-1d03-45c8-a786-23d8ece3d391.png Url : http://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/pipermail/freesurfer/attachments/20181206/ba5363e8/attachment-0002.png -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AS_BRONZE_IIDD_65c26b0a-ea45-42c8-956e-5d84e884e4e6.png Type: image/png Size: 14930 bytes Desc: AS_BRONZE_IIDD_65c26b0a-ea45-42c8-956e-5d84e884e4e6.png Url : http://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/pipermail/freesurfer/attachments/20181206/ba5363e8/attachment-0003.png ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 10:24:32 -0500 (EST) From: Bruce Fischl <fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] visual cortex {Disarmed} To: Freesurfer support list <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <alpine.lrh.2.20.1812061022450.12...@gate.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hi Zheng if you mean primary visual cortex, then you can use our estimate of BA17 which is stored in the subject's label subdirectory (as are BA18 and MT). If you mean all of visually-responsive cortex I don't think we have anything (nor is that a terribly well-defined concept, since some of it will be multimodal cortex) cheers Bruce On Thu, 6 Dec 2018, ??? wrote: > > ????????External Email - Use Caution???????? > > Hi experts, > > I want to do some research on the cortical thickness of visual cortex > using FS 6.0. Is there specified or associated cortex model for the > segmentation of visual cortex? > Thanks for your reply in advance. I need your help. > > Sincerely, > Zheng > > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from > "maas.mail.163.com" claiming to be MailScanner has detected a possible > fraud attempt from "maas.mail.163.com" claiming to be > [7ab82759fd2726fb1920b652c2487756.jpg] > ??? > ???zhengfenglian0...@163.com > > ??? ?????? ?? > > > ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 16:25:40 +0000 From: "Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D." <dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] [PETsurfer] Use of MGX and RBV partial volume correction To: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu" <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <cbeb56aa-65c2-4ed6-66a6-f9295aae5...@mgh.harvard.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On 11/30/2018 07:15 AM, Matthieu Vanhoutte wrote: > > ????????External Email - Use Caution > > Hi Douglas, > > Thank you for answering. Please find below new questions. > Bien cordialement, > > > Le?ven. 30 nov. 2018 ??00:00, Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D. > <dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu>> a ?crit?: > > Hi Matthieu, sorry for the delay > > On 11/29/2018 12:50 PM, Matthieu Vanhoutte wrote: > >? ? ? ? ? External Email - Use Caution > > > > Dear Freesurfer's experts, > > > > I tried to use PETSurfer to correct partial volume effect on my > FDG PET images, testing both Muller-Gartner and RBV corrections. > > > > I ran the commands specified in PETSurfer website and used the > two following commands for both MGX and RBV corrections respectively: > > > > mri_gtmpvc --i PET.nii.gz --reg register.dof6.lta --psf-col 5.51 > --psf-row 5.51 --psf-slice 5.9 --seg gtmseg.mgz > --default-seg-merge --auto-mask PSF .01 --mgx .01 --o ./gtmpvc.output > > > > mri_gtmpvc --i PET.nii.gz --reg register.dof6.lta --psf-col 5.51 > --psf-row 5.51 --psf-slice 5.9 --seg gtmseg.mgz > --default-seg-merge --auto-mask PSF .01 --rbv --o rbv.output.orig > > > > 1) However, I found that cortical output mgx.ctxgm.nii.gz of MGX > correction encompass more than just GM and values at the > boundaries of mgx.ctxgm.nii.gz seem to me very high or aberrant. > This is expected. The MG method gives you a value every place that > there > is GM signal *in the PET volume after partial volume effects*. So > basically, if you were to take the cortical ribbon and smooth it > by your > PSF, every non-zero voxel has some GM in it (which is why the > edges are > so high). When you run it with --mgx .01, it will exclude voxels that > have less than 1% GM after smoothing. If you you are disturbed by the > wide ribbon, just make the threshold higher. In theory, every point > along the surface normal gives you a valid answer, but the further > from > the center of the ribbon, the noisier it is going to be, so we > generally > only sample it at the center (--projfrac 0.5 to mri_vol2surf). > > > Basically, please find below the mgx.ctxgm with threshold set at 0.01: > image.png > > Then threshold set at 0.1: > image.png > > Values at some parts of the cortex (olfactory, visual) are not the > same between the two thresholds. In the first one in these parts of > the brain, values are higher than the second and seem kind of > aberrant. Is there no reason to prefer a threshold at 0.1 than 0.01 ? > For example, in (Douglas et al., 2016, NeuroImage) a threshold of 0.3 > has been found to be optimal: how determine visually or quantitatively > this optimal threshold ? So when you click on the same voxel in both images, you get different values? Or is it just that the color scale is changing? The threshold should not change the values, just what is in or out of the final mask. The threshold of 0.3 was chosen mainly because it worked for the ROI analysis. In general, you should use GTM instead of MG for ROI analysis. For surface-based analysis, the threshold is not critical because the GM PVF is generally pretty high in cortex. It will make more of a difference in subcortical analysis. > > > > > > 2) Concerning RBV correction, output rbv.nii.gz seems to me > following more precisely the GM ribbon. However contrary to what > is said in PETSurfer website, rbv.nii.gz seems to be in the > anatomical space (not in native PET) at the resolution of > gtmseg.mgz. How then map rbv.nii.gz to the anatomical space when > mapping the volume to the surface ? > Where does it say this? It should be in the anatomical space in the > sense that it shares an RAS space with the conformed volume (aseg > does > gtmseg.mgz). This means that you can use --regheader with > mri_vol2surf > or mri_vol2vol when mapping into another space. > > > ?In https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/PetSurfer it says that > "mgx.ctxgm is in same resolution of the input PET", which is the case > since resolution and orientation are identical to native PET. The > PETsurfer tutorial then explains that "bbpet2anat.lta. is a > registration file that can be used to map the output PET volume (in > the mask bounding box) to the anatomical space". > > However, when I open rbv.nii file it is not in native PET resolution > and orientation but those of gtmseg.mgz (anatomical space but with > resolution of 0.5x0.5x05 mm). Why these differences between these two > methods of PVC and which registration file then to use when mapping > rbv.nii to the surface (rbv2anat.lta ?) ? I think I can't use directly > --regheader since resolution of rbv.nii is 0.5 mm3 whereas anatomical > space is of 1 mm3. Yes, the rbv is in a higher resolution because the rbv does not have separate maps for each tissue type, so you need smaller voxels to avoid re-introducing PVEs. > > > > > 3) What are the advantages/inconveniences of RBV vs GMX ? > Not entirely sure. RBV may be more precise since it at least has the > ability to correct for the PVE across the bank of a sulcus, but > the two > banks have to be in different ROIs. The bad news is that the RBV > correction depends on the ROIs that you use. > > > MGX doesn't correct PVE across the bank of a sulcus ? Correct. > > By saying that "RBV correction depends on the ROIs that you use", do > you mean the parcellation (aparc or aparc.a2009s) you give to the > gtmseg command ? If this is the case is there a better compromise ? It depends on the aparc (and aseg). There is not a better compromise. > > > > > 4) Would it be beneficial to upsample native PET to the > anatomical resolution before launching gtmpvc in order to preserve > the high resolution of the anatomical tissues during partial > volume correction ? > No, this is all taken care of in mri_gtmpvc. > > > > > Could you have a look at and give me back your opinion on these > questions ? I could send the associated files if needed. > > > > Thank you. > > > > Best, Matthieu > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Freesurfer mailing list > > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > <mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> > > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer > > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 16:35:46 +0000 From: "Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D." <dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Fwd: Overall maxima is high and still no significant cluster To: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu" <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <08049174-4c2d-841d-4926-29ad46497...@mgh.harvard.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" For it to show up in the output file, the cluster-wise pvalue must be < .05 (CWT). To see all the clusters regardless of significance, run it with a CWT of 1. If you want to run with a more liberal cluster forming threshold (CFT), you can try using permutation. See http://freesurfer.net/fswiki/FsTutorial/MultipleComparisonsV6.0Perm On 12/05/2018 11:44 PM, Martin Juneja wrote: > > ????????External Email - Use Caution > > > Dear experts, > > Could you please help me in resolving following issue? > > Thanks. > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: *Martin Juneja* <mj70...@gmail.com <mailto:mj70...@gmail.com>> > Date: Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 2:23 PM > Subject: Overall maxima is high and still no significant cluster > To: Freesurfer support list <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > <mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>> > > > Hi FS experts, > > I am estimating the group-behavioral thickness interaction using > contrast 2 FSGD file: > https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Fsgdf2G2V at CFT < 0.01 and > CWT < 0.05 at FWHM of 12 mm. > > I do not find any significant clusters and my output summary text file > looks like the following. This file shows that overall maxima is > 4.58212 (which corresponds to p < 0.0001 because -log (0.0001) = 4, so > I am just wondering despite the fact that maxima is > 4, why I do not > see this cluster in the summary/output *.mgh file? > > I would really appreciate any clarification and tips to modify my > input thresholds so that I do not miss any significant findings here. > > Thanks. > ----------------------------- > > # SearchSpace_mm2 76467.1 > # SearchSpace_vtx 149953 > # Bonferroni 2 > # Minimum Threshold 2 > # Maximum Threshold infinity > # Threshold Sign? ? abs > # AdjustThreshWhenOneTail 1 > # CW PValue Threshold: 0.05 > # Area Threshold? ? 0 mm^2 > # CSD thresh? 2.000000 > # CSD nreps? ? 10000 > # CSD simtype? null-z > # CSD contrast NA > # CSD confint? 90.000000 > # Overall max 4.58212 at vertex 10608 > # Overall min -2.84277 at vertex 75476 # NClusters? ? ? ? ? 0 # FixMNI > = 0 # # ClusterNo? Max? ?VtxMax? ?Size(mm^2)? MNIX ?MNIY? ?MNIZ? ? > CWP? ? > CWPLow? ? CWPHi? ?NVtxs ? WghtVtx? ?Annot > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 16:39:14 +0000 From: "Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D." <dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] mris_preproc paired diff outputs 0 values To: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu" <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <38803f5b-bf98-50f7-7c44-6b1f12e65...@mgh.harvard.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" If you just want to look at the difference maps, you can load the mris_preproc output stack as an overlay, then scroll through each one of them. You're still looking at each one of them, but you don't have to open them up one-by-one. On 12/05/2018 02:21 PM, Sims, Sara A wrote: > > ????????External Email - Use Caution > > I have now gotten this to run on 3 subjects. However I have 786 > subjects and need to find the bad apple. Is there a way I can do > quality checks on each subject?s difference map in fsaverage space > that mris_preproc has made? Basically I want to cycle through the > concatenated file in a systematic way that hopefully doesn?t involve > me opening them one at a time in freeview. How could I do this? > > Sara Sims > > *From: *<freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> on behalf of Sara > Sims <sno...@uab.edu> > *Reply-To: *Freesurfer support list <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> > *Date: *Monday, December 3, 2018 at 10:56 AM > *To: *Freesurfer support list <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> > *Subject: *[Freesurfer] mris_preproc paired diff outputs 0 values > > *????????External Email - Use Caution * > > Hello, > > I am trying to do a paired difference analysis of two runs of > probtrackx (I have already put them on the surface). The two > conditions are ?central? and ?far? for each subject. I have already > checked the individual subjects data and it does indeed have values. > > *Here is a sample of my subject list:* > > 100206.central > > 100206.far > > 100307.central > > 100307.far > > 100408.central > > 100408.far > > ?etc. > > *Here is my mris_preproc script:* > > mris_preproc --target fsaverage --hemi lh --isp > $in/FP/100206.central/lhsurf.mgh --isp $in/FP/100206.far/lhsurf.mgh > --isp $in/FP/100307.central/lhsurf.mgh --isp > $in/FP/100307.far/lhsurf.mgh --isp $in/FP/100408.central/lhsurf.mgh > --isp $in/FP/100408.far/lhsurf.mgh ? --out > $out/preproc_FP_cf_lh/lh.paired-diff.FP_cf.mgh --f $sublist > --paired-diff > > *The output log shows no errors, the number of inputs equals the > number in the subject list and it creates a file but it?s all zeros. I > just have no idea as to why this would happen?* > > ** > > Thanks, > > Sara Sims > > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 16:44:03 +0000 From: "Sanfelici, Rachele" <rachele.sanfel...@med.uni-muenchen.de> Subject: [Freesurfer] fsaverage6 FS6 To: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu" <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <1544114644300.71...@med.uni-muenchen.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/pipermail/freesurfer/attachments/20181206/6d26ee4a/attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 16:49:04 +0000 From: "Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D." <dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Direction of significant group comparison To: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu" <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <e5f547bd-f62f-e5da-a5d0-252ed20ed...@mgh.harvard.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" You can tell from the sign of the "VtxMax" column that indicates the maximum in the cluster. If you used a signed test (pos or neg), then they will all have the given sign. If? you used an unsigned test (abs), then they may have different signs. On 12/04/2018 11:54 AM, Backhausen, Lea wrote: > > ????????External Email - Use Caution > > Dear FreeSurfer experts, > > I am running whole-brain based group comparisons of cortical measures > between a patient group and a control group using glm-fit and > Monte-Carlo correction for multiple comparisons. > > It works fine but I am not sure where to find information on which > group has more or less volume, for example, in a significant cluster. > > I use the xxx.sig.cluster.summary files which give me something like > this: > > ClusterNo > > > > Max > > > > VtxMax > > > > Size(mm^2) > > > > MNIX > > > > MNIY > > > > MNIZ > > > > CWP > > > > CWPLow > > > > CWPHi > > > > NVtxs > > > > WghtVtx > > > > Annot > > 1 > > > > 3.806 > > > > 82573 > > > > 3279.56 > > > > 44.3 > > > > 22.8 > > > > 29.5 > > > > 0.00020 > > > > 0.00000 > > > > 0.00040 > > > > 5510 > > > > 11256.20 > > > > rostralmiddlefrontal > > 2 > > > > 2.099 > > > > 122283 > > > > 806.53 > > > > 38.4 > > > > -69.6 > > > > 44.6 > > > > 0.68055 > > > > 0.67327 > > > > 0.68774 > > > > 1654 > > > > 2759.09 > > > > inferiorparietal > > Is the direction hidden somewhere or in another file? Do I have to run > additional commands to get to the information? > > Thank you so much for any advice! > > Best > > Lea > > ------------------------------ > > Lea Backhausen > > Research Assistant > > Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine of > the TU Dresden, Germany http://www.uniklinikum-dresden.de > <http://www.uniklinikum-dresden.de/> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 16:50:22 +0000 From: "Greve, Douglas N.,Ph.D." <dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu> Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] Extracting ROI from atlases To: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu" <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <1863a51b-b55f-5088-4e90-ca18c3876...@mgh.harvard.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" You can use mri_binarize --i aparc+aseg.mgz --match 1028 --o ctx-lh-superiorfrontal.nii.gz See? $FREESURFER_HOME/FreeSurferColorLUT.txt for the list of codes to use On 12/04/2018 12:51 PM, Song, Da-Yea wrote: > > ????????External Email - Use Caution > > Hello, > > Is there a command to extract ROIs from atlases (ex. desikan) in nifti > file formats? > > Thank you so much in advance for your time. > > Best, > > Da-Yea > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Disclaimer: > > > The materials in this e-mail are private and may contain Protected > Information. Please note that e-mail communication is not encrypted by > default. You have the right to request further emails be encrypted by > notifying the sender. Your continued use of e-mail constitutes your > acknowledgment of these confidentiality and security limitations. If > you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized > use, disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in > reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. > If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify > the sender via telephone or return e-mail. > > > _______________________________________________ > Freesurfer mailing list > Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer End of Freesurfer Digest, Vol 178, Issue 7 ****************************************** _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
