Hi,

Thanks both of you.

On 17/11/15 21:32 , "Timothy Coalson" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 
wrote:
So, cifti is not a 1:1 mapping to surface vertices.  If what you plan to use 
can read gifti, the less error-prone route is probably to use -cifti-separate 
to get a nifti volume and gifti files that do have a 1:1 mapping to vertices.

@Tim: By “not a 1:1 mapping to surface vertices”, do you mean:

  1.  The CIFTI data-value:vertex mapping is not necessarily bijective (unique)?
  2.  The CIFTI data-value:vertex mapping is not necessarily complete (some 
vertices may not be represented)?
  3.  A combination of 1 & 2?

I hope it’s (2), because otherwise I’m confused (again!).

A follow-on question is then why would it be less error-prone to use 
-cifti–separate (as opposed to e.g. -cifti-export-dense-mapping)?
I can see that using -cifti-export-dense-mapping on the Conn3.dconn.nii file 
lists a non-contiguous mapping of node-IDs:Vertex-Ids, presumably due to the 
omission of the vertices on medial wall that are covered by the subcortical 
ROIs, i.e.

CortexLeft, Total entries: 29696 (Node IDs:  0-29695,  Vertice IDs: 0-32491)
CortexRight, Total entries: 29716 (Node IDs: 29696-59411, Vertice IDs: 0-32491)
SubCortical, Total entries: 31870 (Node IDs: 59412-91281)

Is this what you were referring to?

I then tried using some of your suggestions to extract the labels from the 
aparc32k atlas in 100307/MNINonLinear/fsaverage_LR32k.
I tried the following 3 workflows:

(A)
> wb_command -cifti-separate 100307.aparc.32k_fs_LR.dlabel.nii COLUMN -label 
> CORTEX_LEFT aparc32k_fs_LR_dlabel_Separated_CortexLeft.gii
> wb_command -gifti-convert ASCII 
> aparc32k_fs_LR_dlabel_Separated_CortexLeft.gii 
> aparc32k_fs_LR_dlabel_Separated_GiftiConvert_CortexLeft.txt
> cp aparc32k_fs_LR_dlabel_Separated_GiftiConvert_CortexLeft.txt 
> aparc32k_fs_LR_dlabel_Separated_GiftiConvert_CortexLeft_LabelsOnly.txt
# Strip away all header/footer XML codes from 
aparc32k_fs_LR_dlabel_Separated_GiftiConvert_CortexLeft_LabelsOnly.txt using 
emacs
> wc -l aparc32k_fs_LR_dlabel_Separated_GiftiConvert_CortexLeft_LabelsOnly.txt
32492

(B)
> wb_command -gifti-convert ASCII 100307.L.aparc.32k_fs_LR.label.gii 
> L_aparc32k_fs_LR_label_GiftiConvert_CortexLeft.txt
> cp L_aparc32k_fs_LR_label_GiftiConvert_CortexLeft.txt 
> L_aparc32k_fs_LR_label_GiftiConvert_CortexLeft_LabelsOnly.txt
# Strip away all header/footer XML codes from 
L_aparc32k_fs_LR_label_GiftiConvert_CortexLeft_LabelsOnly.txt using emacs
> wc -l L_aparc32k_fs_LR_label_GiftiConvert_CortexLeft_LabelsOnly.txt
32492

(C)
> wb_command -cifti-convert -to-text 100307.aparc.32k_fs_LR.dlabel.nii 
> aparc32k_fs_LR_dlabel_ConvertedToText_NodeID_LabelOnly_CortexAll.txt
> wc -l aparc32k_fs_LR_dlabel_ConvertedToText_NodeID_LabelOnly_CortexAll.txt
59412

As you can see, they all gave the expected number of outputs (the latter one 
with the medial wall vertices already removed)

However, when I look at the first few labels, there are some differences 
between set (A) and (B):
 A     B      C
10 10 10
29 29 29
24 24 24
28 28 28
11 11 11
31 31 31
27 27 27
0 -1 13
13 13 15
15 15 35
35 35 35
35 35 10
10 10 10
10 10 10
10 10 10
10 10 10
10 10 10
10 10 10
10 10 10
10 10 10
10 10 10
0 10 10
0 10 10
0 10 10
0 10 10
0 10 10
0 10 10
0 -1 10
0 -1 10
0 -1 10
0 -1 10
0 -1 10
0 -1 10
0 -1 10
0 -1 10

Shouldn’t these two give the same? Or maybe this is the errors you were 
referring to?

Thanks in advance,

M@


Otherwise, have a look at -cifti-label-export-table, -cifti-convert -to-text 
(other options exist here for nifti-1 and gifti), and 
-cifti-export-dense-mapping in order to get text files that can get you to the 
vertex mapping.

Tim


On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:25 AM, 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Try this:

wb_command -gifti-convert ASCII my.label.gii ascii.label.gii

If needed, strip everything up to <Data>, and then the label values are
listed in vertex sequence.

Will need to think about the HOA question.  Hmmm.

Donna

> Hi Donna,
>
> Many thanks for your thorough reply. I can see that I wasn’t very clear
> on explaining what we are trying to achieve – I’ll try to clarify
> things a little :-)
>
> What we have done so far:
> Generated Conn3.dconn.nii files: 92K x 92K structural connectivity
> matrices from the DWI data in FSL’s matrix3 format (WM seeds, cortical
> surface & subcortical voxels as targets).
> This provides us with connectivity matrices whose nodes are (to the limit
> of the HCP registration pipeline) anatomically matched across subjects.
>
> What we are analyzing:
> Machine-learning parcellation of these connectivity matrices.
>
> What we would like to do:
> Compare our machine-learning parcellations with previously published /
> commonly-used ones.
> For this we would like to be able to obtain, for each atlas, a label per
> node of the connectivity matrices.
> For some atlases, e.g. Desikan-Killiany, I realise that these labels:node
> mappings will vary per subject as the atlas is adapted according to the
> individual’s gyrification patterns.
> For other atlases though, e.g. the Gordon 2014 atlas, the label:node
> mapping is fixed.
> It would also be great if we could compare against some MNI-based
> parcellation schemes, such as the Harvard-Oxford. (Other suggestions
> welcome!)
>
> So to my questions! :-)
>
> 1) What is the best way to get the per-subject label:node mapping from the
> existing *.dlabel.nii and *.label.gii files?
> I was thinking of using something like:
>
> wb_command -file–information
> 100307/MNINonLinear/fsaverage_LR32k/100307.aparc.a2009s.32k_fs_LR.dlabel.nii
>
> which gives me (with a bit of filtering) a parcel:label mapping.
> Then using:
>
> wb_command -nifti-information -print-matrix
> 100307/MNINonLinear/fsaverage_LR32k/100307.aparc.a2009s.32k_fs_LR.dlabel.nii
>
> to give me a vertex:parcel mapping. Then I need to stitch the two together
> somehow.
> Are these steps correct? Is there a better (easier) way?
>
> 2) Would I use the same method for the Gordon atlas (which I understand is
> provided on the standard 32K mesh)?
>
> 3) How would I do this for, e.g. the Harvard-Oxford atlas? Should I map
> the voxelwise parcels onto the 32K mesh first and then use the same method
> as for (2)?
>
> I’m still a surface-space novice, but I hope this is a bit clearer now
> :-)
>
> Many thanks for any help/advice!
>
> Cheers,
>
> M@
>
> On 13/11/15 20:25 , "Donna Dierker"
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>>
>  wrote:
>
> Hi Matthew,
>
> The aparc files Jenn meant are generated by Freesurfer, but we make them
> available in cifti (*dlabel.nii) and gifti (*.label.gii) formats:
>
> * 164k standard mesh
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/994273.aparc.164k_fs_LR.dlabel.nii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/994273.aparc.a2009s.164k_fs_LR.dlabel.nii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/994273.L.aparc.164k_fs_LR.label.gii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/994273.L.aparc.a2009s.164k_fs_LR.label.gii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/994273.R.aparc.164k_fs_LR.label.gii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/994273.R.aparc.a2009s.164k_fs_LR.label.gii
> * 32k standard mesh
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/fsaverage_LR32k/994273.aparc.32k_fs_LR.dlabel.nii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/fsaverage_LR32k/994273.aparc.a2009s.32k_fs_LR.dlabel.nii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/fsaverage_LR32k/994273.L.aparc.32k_fs_LR.label.gii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/fsaverage_LR32k/994273.L.aparc.a2009s.32k_fs_LR.label.gii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/fsaverage_LR32k/994273.R.aparc.32k_fs_LR.label.gii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/fsaverage_LR32k/994273.R.aparc.a2009s.32k_fs_LR.label.gii
> * native mesh
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/Native/994273.aparc.a2009s.native.dlabel.nii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/Native/994273.aparc.native.dlabel.nii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/Native/994273.L.aparc.a2009s.native.label.gii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/Native/994273.L.aparc.native.label.gii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/Native/994273.R.aparc.a2009s.native.label.gii
> Structural_preproc/MNINonLinear/Native/994273.R.aparc.native.label.gii
>
> If you get the structural extended packages, you can get the original
> Freesurfer subject directory (e.g. Structural_preproc/T1w/994273).
>
> Note these include not only the Desikan-Killiany (aparc), but also the
> Destrieux (aparc.a2009s):
>
> https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/CorticalParcellation
>
> The only relation these have to the Conte69 is that they are both
> available in the 164k and 32k standard meshes.  These are very nice
> parcellations Freesurfer provides in normal processing; we just make them
> available on different meshes/formats for the HCP subjects.
>
> I assume you are interested in anatomical parcellations only, and not
> functional (e.g.,
> https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/CorticalParcellation_Yeo2011).
> I think you will see improved parcellations coming out soon, so stay
> tuned.
>
> I am not a diffusion expert, so I don't have a good feel for what you are
> trying to do, though it may involve identifying where tracts terminate and
> seeing how often varying parcellations agree using the same tracts (???).
>
> Donna
>
>
> On Nov 13, 2015, at 8:35 AM, Matthew George Liptrot
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>>
>  wrote:
>
> Hiya,
> We would like to compare several parcellation schemes with the results of
> structural connectivity on the HCP data (we have generated dense
> connectome data for several subjects).
> The Freesurfer parcellation (which is based upon the Conte69 atlas?) is
> already provided on the 32K subject mesh, but we would like to compare
> others, e.g. Desikan-Killiany, Harvard-Oxford, microstructure etc. In
> short:
> 1) What would be the optimal way to do this?
> 2) Which wb_commands should we use?
> 3) Which atlases would people recommend (we want to look at replication
> performance across subjects)
> 4) There seems to only be a small subset of Brodmann areas in the
> distributed subjects’ 32K CIFTI files (mainly the visual cortex and
> areas around pre- and post-central gyrus). Any reason why the rest are
> missing?
> Thanks in advance for any pointers!
> Cheers,
> M@
> On 4/11/15 23:17 , "Jennifer Elam"
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>>
>  wrote:
> Hi Vishal,
> Also, the FreeSurfer-generated aparc and aparc.a2009s non-overlapping
> parcellations for each subject are available on the 32k_fs_LR mesh and
> 164k mesh in the Structural preprocessed package for each subject. These
> are available as GIFTI label files per hemisphere and as CIFTI dlabel
> files (both hemispheres).
>
> Best,
> Jenn
>
> Jennifer Elam, Ph.D.
> Outreach Coordinator, Human Connectome Project
> Washington University School of Medicine
> Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, Box 8108
> 660 South Euclid Avenue
> St. Louis, MO 63110
> 314-362-9387<tel:314-362-9387>
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> www.humanconnectome.org<http://www.humanconnectome.org>
>
> From:
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
>  On Behalf Of Harms,
> Michael
> Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2015 3:40 PM
> To: Vishal Patel;
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] Hcp Data with non-overlapping parcellations
>
>
> Hi Vishal,
> There is a version of the hard parcellation from Gordon et al. (Cerebral
> Cortex, 2014) available as a CIFTI 'dlabel.nii' file, if you are
> interested in that.
>
> cheers,
> -MH
>
> --
> Michael Harms, Ph.D.
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> Conte Center for the Neuroscience of Mental Disorders
> Washington University School of Medicine
> Department of Psychiatry, Box 8134
> 660 South Euclid Ave. Tel: 314-747-6173<tel:314-747-6173>
> St. Louis, MO  63110 Email: 
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
>
> From: Vishal Patel 
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>>
> Date: Wednesday, November 4, 2015 1:42 PM
> To: 
> "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>"
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>>
> Subject: [HCP-Users] Hcp Data with non-overlapping parcellations
>
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone have access to HCP data that has been parcellated in
> non-overlapping regions or can point me in the right direction?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Vishal

--
Matthew George Liptrot

<http://about.me/matthewliptrot>
Department of Computer Science
University of Copenhagen
&
Section for Cognitive Systems
Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science
Technical University of Denmark

http://about.me/matthewliptrot

<http://about.me/matthewliptrot>


_______________________________________________
HCP-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users

Reply via email to