Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Jul 16.
Published in final edited form as: Neuroimage. 2012 Mar 30;61(4):1017–1030. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.03.071

Figure 8.

Figure 8

Comparison of eight pathway systems reconstructed using GT and LT from a randomly chosen female human subject. The ROI placements, based on Catani and Thiebault de Schotten (Catani and Thiebaut de Schotten, 2008), were identical for the two methods. We departed from Catani and Thiebault de Schotten only in the delineation of the arcuate fasciculus (AF), where we found one ROI was not adequate for delineating the pathway and therefore used a two ROI method (Rilling JK et al., 2008). For each fiber pathway system, the maximal intensity projection (MIP) was used to visualize the derived fiber pathways and images were projected on the axial, coronal and sagittal planes. The results of the derived pathways were thresholded by the mean intensity of that specific fiber pathway. For each section, the upper and lower rows show the pathway reconstructed using GT and LT, respectively. Obvious differences in the orientation and intensity in the MIP images between the two methods were indicated using white arrows. The background is the subject’s FA image. CR: coronal radiata; CC: corpus callosum; IFOF: inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus; UF: uncinate fasciculus; AF: arcuate fasciculus; Fx: fornix; ILF: inferior longitudinal fasciculus; Ci: cingulum.