SPM: Note that in later iterations, SPM defined its own “space” based on scans acquired within the IXI dataset, leveraging on the concept of segmentation-based normalizations (as applied in the Unified Segmentation, DARTEL and SHOOT approaches). This was adopted to define standard anatomy by the International Consortium of Brain Mapping (ICBM) and is used by SPM from version 99 on. MNI152 linear: 152 normal images were linearly coregistered (9-param) to the 305 space. 
In the original release, only a T1 template was available. This was used as the standard template in SPM96.
Colin27 original: Colin Holmes, a lab member of the MNI, was scanned 27 times. MNI305: 305 normal MRI brains were linearly coregistered (9-param) to 241 brains that had been coregistered (roughly) to the Talairach atlas. However, in disciplines like deep brain stimulation imaging – where millimeters do matter – the subtle changes between spaces may definitely impact results.Ī brief overview about the historical development (largely informed by the Brett post and paper) Within the field of classical neuroimaging (fMRI, dMRI), the slight differences between various versions of the MNI space may not matter. It is known to some but should be known to more people in the field that there is no such thing as a single “MNI space”. This post is motivated to shed some light onto the different “MNI spaces” available today, their differences and commonalities. Nowadays, the Talairach space doesn’t play a big role in modern neuroscience anymore, however, the MNI space of course continues to do. 
Since first publication of this post, a better resource about different coordinate systems has been established by the BIDS team. Also see his 2002 paper on this matter (1). A while ago, Matthew Brett wrote an explanatory post and a review paper about the “MNI space”, its historical development and origins which largely focused on the differences between Talairach and MNI space.
0 kommentar(er)
