See inline below.

On 10/01/2009 02:34 PM, Michael Arcaro wrote:
> Hi Donna,
>
> Thanks for the heads up. I'm was a bit confused as to the differences  
> between Caret and Surefit datasets. I tried using SUMA's Make_Spec  
> script for Caret surfaces. I noticed that I had to rename the files  
> slightly for the program to recognize the .coord and .topo files.
>
> I also had to edit the SUMA .spec file. When, I initially included  
> both F6 and F99 datasets, the node correspondence between surfaces was  
> lost. By creating .spec files that only load F6 or F99 surfaces, node  
> correspondence is maintained when switching between surfaces (within  
> F6 or F99 datasets) in SUMA.
>   
Hmmm. No clue there, but I bet Ziad would have some ideas.
> The next issue was mapping on the curvature. As you suggested,  
> extracting the curvature column and making a 1D.dset did the trick.  
> Interestingly, this 1D.dset file works for both F6 and F99 datasets  
> and appears to have proper mapping for surfaces in both datasets. This  
> seems a bit odd since I could maintain node correspondence when  
> switching between F6 and F99 surfaces in the same .spec file.
>   
I think you mean "could maintain node correspondence when switching 
between F6 and F99 surfaces in the same .spec file," based on my 
understanding of your previous paragraph.

Again, I can't explain what you saw in the paragraph preceding my "Hmmm" 
response above.

But I can explain why the 1D works for both: David took great pains to 
register both F6 and F99 to the standard 73730 mesh. Thank David Van Essen.
> I also extracted the border projections into a .1D.dset which maps  
> onto the surfaces fine. It's a bit of a hack job, but I haven't found  
> any tutorials on SUMA on how to properly load .paint or .borderproj  
> files. This also seems to  properly map onto both F6 and F99 datasets.
>   
This is a first to my knowledge. I'm not sure how SUMA handles borders.
> This is what I really care about. I hope to use the SUMA tools to warp  
> the F6 dataset and my own datasets into a standard / aligned space.  
>   
Are you using something like the Argall, et. al. method to register your 
subjects?
> All my data is on the surface. I don't think I will need to project  
> back into volume space, so the point of origin should not be an issue  
> for me.
>
> Mike
>
>
> On Oct 1, 2009, at 2:24 PM, Donna Dierker wrote:
>
>   
>> Mike,
>>
>> Just as a heads up, when SUMA was first developed, Caret and SureFit
>> were separate.  (SureFit generated segmentations and surfaces; Caret
>> displayed, flattened, and registered surfaces.)  In those days,
>> SureFit's origin was at the lower left corner of the cropped bounding
>> box.  When SureFit merged into Caret, there was a migration from voxel
>> space to coordinate space, and the origin moved to the AC (or whatever
>> the origin in the volume fed to Caret for segmentation).  If SUMA
>> translates the surface by some parameters defined in the .params file,
>> you'll see major misalignment between surface and volume.  I think  
>> Ziad
>> has a work-around for this -- perhaps a flag added to the coord header
>> to indicate it is post-SureFit.  The F6 and F99 datasets are post- 
>> SureFit.
>>
>> It is possible that you'll need to convert the surface shape file to
>> ASCII ; strip the header; and extract the curvature column into a "1D"
>> file.  But it is worth posting to the AFNI message board.
>>
>> Donna
>>
>> On 10/01/2009 12:34 PM, Michael Arcaro wrote:
>>     
>>> Thanks Donna,
>>>
>>> I'll use the F6.BOTH.withF99 dataset. I've had success loading
>>> individual surfaces into SUMA (after converting the files to ASCII),
>>> but haven't figured out how to load / display the curvature. Since
>>> this is probably more related to SUMA and figuring out how to  
>>> properly
>>> load the data with SUMA, I'll follow up with the AFNI/SUMA folk for
>>> more help.
>>>
>>> It also appears that SUMA is looking for a .params file. I generated
>>> one in Caret from File-> save data file (after loading the atlas
>>> spec). I assume this should be sufficient.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 1, 2009, at 9:38 AM, Donna Dierker wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Hi Mike,
>>>>
>>>> 1) F6 dataset:  Probably only David knows for sure, but
>>>> Macaque.F6.BOTH.SURF-VOL.Std-MESH.73730 is dated 3/9/2007, while
>>>> Macaque.F6.BOTH.withF99-Data.Std-MESH.73730 is dated 8/16/2007.   
>>>> Since
>>>> they have many files in common, my guess is that the latter was
>>>> based on
>>>> the former, but has an important enhancement:
>>>> Macaque.F99UA1.COMPOSITE_PartititioningSchemes.73730.borderproj.  It
>>>> has
>>>> the partitioning schemes not only in paint form, but also border  
>>>> form.
>>>> I'd use the latter.
>>>>
>>>> 2) SUMA interoperability:  While John Harwell (our lab) has worked
>>>> with
>>>> Ziad Saad and Rick Reynolds (AFNI/SUMA orbit) on GIFTI, a neutral
>>>> surface file format akin to what NIfTI does for volumes, I don't  
>>>> think
>>>> you need to convert your surfaces to GIFTI in order for SUMA to read
>>>> them.  Ziad has worked pretty hard to make SUMA read Caret surfaces
>>>> with
>>>> little tweaking.  We did uncover some issues recently with the way
>>>> Caret
>>>> was writing AFNI .HEAD files, but sticking with NIfTI, where  
>>>> possible,
>>>> should avoid these problems.  That said, both the datasets mentioned
>>>> above have AFNI volumes, so if you run into any alignment issues
>>>> between
>>>> the volume and the surface in SUMA, let us know.  I don't  
>>>> necessarily
>>>> anticipate problems.
>>>>
>>>> Donna
>>>>
>>>> On 09/30/2009 03:15 PM, Michael Arcaro wrote:
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm interested in mapping some macaque fMRI data onto the macaque
>>>>> atlases, specifically the Lewis - Van Essen '00 atlas. I'm new to
>>>>> Caret and have a couple of basic questions:
>>>>>
>>>>> First, is there a recommended atlas dataset to use? (F6 or F99)  
>>>>> From
>>>>> the tutorial, it sounds as if I would want to go with the F6 atlas.
>>>>> Assuming I go with the F6, what are the differences between:
>>>>> Macaque.F6.BOTH.SURF-VOL.Std-MESH.73730
>>>>> Macaque.F6.BOTH.withF99-Data.Std-MESH.73730
>>>>> Is there a reason to use one of these above the other?
>>>>>
>>>>> Second, I'm looking to import the atlas into SUMA to warp/align  
>>>>> with
>>>>> my data. I'm having a bit of difficulty with this. From what I have
>>>>> read, SUMA can read Caret format. I was wondering if I need to
>>>>> convert
>>>>> any of the files into a different format for SUMA to read (or
>>>>> possibly
>>>>> rename the files). This may be more of a question for the SUMA  
>>>>> folk,
>>>>> but I thought I'd see if anyone here is familiar with importing the
>>>>> atlases into SUMA.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Mike Arcaro
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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