Skip to main content
. 2011 Jul 1;57(1-4):101–112. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.04.018

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Maps of tSNR, percent improvement in tSNR and SNR′0 spatially normalized into MNI space and averaged over 5 subjects. Results are shown for data acquired with flip angle = 70°. Top row: tSNR map after physiological noise correction model (6) (HW & CRP & RV & HR & MP). Note the higher tSNR in the white matter. Second row: percent improvement in tSNR calculated after physiological noise correction model (4) compared to model (1): % ((tSNR4 / tSNR1) − 1). Third row: percent improvement in tSNR calculated after physiological noise correction models (6) compared to model (1): % ((tSNR6 / tSNR1) − 1). Bottom row: SNR′0 map where SNR′0 = κ SNR0. Note that this is the same for all correction models. The black contours illustrate the boundaries of the VC and LGN ROIs in MNI space rather than the actual subject specific gray matter ROIs used to analyze the tSNR and SNR′0 values. Note the large improvement in tSNR for % ((tSNR6 / tSNR1) − 1) especially in the VC ROI and around the edges of the brain whereas for % ((tSNR4 / tSNR1) − 1) the improvements are more specifically located in regions typically associated with physiological effects such as the regions of high vasculature.