TY - JOUR
T1 - The impact of traditional neuroimaging methods on the spatial localization of cortical areas
AU - Coalson, Timothy S.
AU - Van Essen, David C.
AU - Glasser, Matthew F.
N1 - Funding Information:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. We thank Alan Anticevic, Michael Harms, Erin Dickie, Babatunde Adeyemo, Takuya Hayashi, Bruce Fischl, Steve Smith, and Tom Nichols for comments and suggestions. This work was supported by Grants NIH F30 MH097312 (to M.F.G.), R01 MH-60974 (to D.C.V.E.), and 3R24 MH108315 (to D.C.V.E.). Data were provided by the Human Connectome Project, Washington University–University of Minnesota Consortium (Principal Investigators: D.C.V.E. and Kamil Ugurbil) (1U54MH091657) funded by the 16 NIH Institutes and Centers that support the NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research; and by the McDonnell Center for Systems Neuroscience at Washington University in St. Louis.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 National Academy of Sciences. All Rights Reserved.
PY - 2018/7/3
Y1 - 2018/7/3
N2 - Localizing human brain functions is a long-standing goal in systems neuroscience. Toward this goal, neuroimaging studies have traditionally used volume-based smoothing, registered data to volume-based standard spaces, and reported results relative to volume-based parcellations. A novel 360-area surface-based cortical parcellation was recently generated using multimodal data from the Human Connectome Project, and a volume-based version of this parcellation has frequently been requested for use with traditional volume-based analyses. However, given the major methodological differences between traditional volumetric and Human Connectome Project-style processing, the utility and interpretability of such an altered parcellation must first be established. By starting from automatically generated individual-subject parcellations and processing them with different methodological approaches, we show that traditional processing steps, especially volume-based smoothing and registration, substantially degrade cortical area localization compared with surface-based approaches. We also show that surface-based registration using features closely tied to cortical areas, rather than to folding patterns alone, improves the alignment of areas, and that the benefits of high-resolution acquisitions are largely unexploited by traditional volume-based methods. Quantitatively, we show that the most common version of the traditional approach has spatial localization that is only 35% as good as the best surface-based method as assessed using two objective measures (peak areal probabilities and “captured area fraction” for maximum probability maps). Finally, we demonstrate that substantial challenges exist when attempting to accurately represent volume-based group analysis results on the surface, which has important implications for the interpretability of studies, both past and future, that use these volume-based methods.
AB - Localizing human brain functions is a long-standing goal in systems neuroscience. Toward this goal, neuroimaging studies have traditionally used volume-based smoothing, registered data to volume-based standard spaces, and reported results relative to volume-based parcellations. A novel 360-area surface-based cortical parcellation was recently generated using multimodal data from the Human Connectome Project, and a volume-based version of this parcellation has frequently been requested for use with traditional volume-based analyses. However, given the major methodological differences between traditional volumetric and Human Connectome Project-style processing, the utility and interpretability of such an altered parcellation must first be established. By starting from automatically generated individual-subject parcellations and processing them with different methodological approaches, we show that traditional processing steps, especially volume-based smoothing and registration, substantially degrade cortical area localization compared with surface-based approaches. We also show that surface-based registration using features closely tied to cortical areas, rather than to folding patterns alone, improves the alignment of areas, and that the benefits of high-resolution acquisitions are largely unexploited by traditional volume-based methods. Quantitatively, we show that the most common version of the traditional approach has spatial localization that is only 35% as good as the best surface-based method as assessed using two objective measures (peak areal probabilities and “captured area fraction” for maximum probability maps). Finally, we demonstrate that substantial challenges exist when attempting to accurately represent volume-based group analysis results on the surface, which has important implications for the interpretability of studies, both past and future, that use these volume-based methods.
KW - Blurring
KW - CIFTI grayordinates
KW - Cross-subject alignment
KW - Neuroimaging analysis
KW - Standard space
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85049374154&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1073/pnas.1801582115
DO - 10.1073/pnas.1801582115
M3 - Article
C2 - 29925602
AN - SCOPUS:85049374154
SN - 0027-8424
VL - 115
SP - E6356-E6365
JO - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
JF - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
IS - 27
ER -