What’s the best name of our field and what’s the best attributing term for our data? There are many competing options: “Layer fMRI”, “mesoscopic fMRI”, “sub-millimeter fMRI”, “ultra-high resolution fMRI”, “laminar fMRI”, “cortical depth-dependent fMRI”. They differ with respect to how flashy they are, how scientifically appropriate they are, and how popular they are.
In this blog post, I want to review which ones are the most popular ones in the field and also share some thoughts on my favourite candidates.
Edits on March 3rd 2019 with contributions and clarifications taken from Kamil Uludağ, Sri Kashyap and Faruk Gulban.
CBV-fMRI with VASO is highly dependent on a good inversion contrast. It gives it its CBV sensitivity and is also responsible for most of the VASO specific pitfalls (e.g. inflow, CSF etc. ). And thus, it should be optimized as much as possible.
In this blog post, I want to describe the most important features of a reliable inversion pulse for the application of VASO at 7T with a head transmit coil.
In the last years, I and multiple other VASO users have encountered many occasions of voxels that show negative CBV change (positive VASO signal change) while the BOLD suggests that the activation should be positive. In this blog post, I want to list potential sources of this surprising effect.
In this blog post, I want to write about pipelines on how to prepare Nifti-brain data and make them printable by a 3D-printer.
Two pipelines are shown. One pipeline describes the 3D-printing the cortical folding structure that is estimated with Freesurfer and subsequently corrected with Meshlab. And another pipeline describes how you can 3D-print any binary nii-volume by using the AFNI-program IsoSurface and correct the output with netfabb. Continue reading “3D-printing nii data”→
Often we would like to normalize depth-dependent fMRI signals and assign it to specific cytoarchitectonially defined cortical layers. However, we often only have access to cytoarchitectonial histology data in the form to figures in papers. But since we only have the web-view or the PDF available, we cannot easily extract those data as a layer-profile. Since most layering tools are designed for nii data only, paper figures (e.g. jpg or GNP) are not straight-forwardly transformed to layer profiles.
In this blob post, I describe a set of steps on how to convert any paper figure into a nii-file that allows the extraction of layer profiles.
In this blog post I want to discuss how the tSNR in sub-millimeter fMRI can be substantially improved by optimizing the GRAPPA regularization. Adjusting one single GRAPPA reconstruction parameter can almost double the tSNR of your fMRI time series. With almost no penalty.
This post documents the installation of an IDEA VE11 virtual box on a mac as done on May 14th 2018
Big thanks to Andy for figuring out how this works
Here I start with a already built images of IDEA on windows vista and mars on Ubuntu. the images from FMRIF can be taken from erbium.nimh.nih.gov:/fmrif/projects/SiemensIdea/virtual_machines/OVF/): IDEA_ve11c-mars.ova and IDEA_ve11c+vd13d+vd13a.ova
At high resolution EPI, the gradients are pushed to their limits and the ramp sampling ratio is particularly large. This means that the ghosting is increased and the Nyquist ghost correction is getting more important. In this post, I describe how to change the Nyquist ghost correction algorithm.
With respect to high-resolution VASO application, visual cortex is very unique. I found it to be a challenging area. However, because of its high demand, I have been working on is with multiple collaborators. The most important pitfalls of SS-SI VASO in visual cortex that I came across in these collaborations are discussed below.
The take home message tat I learned from manny experiments is:
Use axial slices with the phase encoding direction A>>P.
Watch out for negative voxels.
Invest a lot of effort in optimizing GRAPPA parameters, its worth it.
In layer-fMRI, we spend so much time and effort to achieve high spatial resolutions and small voxel sizes during the acquisition. However, during the evaluation pipeline much of this spatial resolution can be lost during multiple resampling steps.
In this post, I want to discuss sources of signal blurring during spatial resampling steps and potential strategies to account for them.
This blog post discusses the resolution loss when applying partial-Fourier imaging in GE-EPI in the presence of strong T2*-decay.
I found that that when I was aiming for high-resolutions, it is beneficial to refrain from the application of partial Fourier (PF) imaging as much as possible. For the long readout durations at high-resolutions and the fast T2/T2*-decay at high field strengths results in even stronger blurring of partial-Fourier.