open-discussion
open-discussion > RE: Result of the 2010 PNAS paper
Nov 18, 2013 01:11 PM | Maarten Mennes
RE: Result of the 2010 PNAS paper
Dear Jonathan,
no, I don't think you missed something. The clipping you observed is the result of combining +1000 datasets that implemented slightly different coverage in their sequences. We've excluded the ones with worst coverage, but as you can tell we still missed the top of the brain and the entire cerebellum when combining.
To obtain full brain coverage you'll have to look through the different datasets and only include those with coverage you like.
Hope this helps,
Maarten
no, I don't think you missed something. The clipping you observed is the result of combining +1000 datasets that implemented slightly different coverage in their sequences. We've excluded the ones with worst coverage, but as you can tell we still missed the top of the brain and the entire cerebellum when combining.
To obtain full brain coverage you'll have to look through the different datasets and only include those with coverage you like.
Hope this helps,
Maarten
Threaded View
Title | Author | Date |
---|---|---|
Fang-Cheng Yeh | Apr 3, 2012 | |
Maarten Mennes | Apr 3, 2012 | |
Jonathan Ipser | Nov 18, 2013 | |
Maarten Mennes | Nov 18, 2013 | |
Fang-Cheng Yeh | Apr 4, 2012 | |
Maarten Mennes | Apr 5, 2012 | |
Fang-Cheng Yeh | Apr 17, 2012 | |
Maarten Mennes | Apr 18, 2012 | |
Fang-Cheng Yeh | Apr 18, 2012 | |
Fang-Cheng Yeh | Apr 18, 2012 | |
Fang-Cheng Yeh | Apr 5, 2012 | |