Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2010 Jun;51(2):677-83.
doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.02.048. Epub 2010 Mar 1.

Comparison of the disparity between Talairach and MNI coordinates in functional neuroimaging data: validation of the Lancaster transform

Angela R Laird  1 , Jennifer L Robinson, Kathryn M McMillan, Diana Tordesillas-Gutiérrez, Sarah T Moran, Sabina M Gonzales, Kimberly L Ray, Crystal Franklin, David C Glahn, Peter T Fox, Jack L Lancaster
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Comparison of the disparity between Talairach and MNI coordinates in functional neuroimaging data: validation of the Lancaster transform

Angela R Laird et al. Neuroimage. 2010 Jun.

Abstract

Spatial normalization of neuroimaging data is a standard step when assessing group effects. As a result of divergent analysis procedures due to different normalization algorithms or templates, not all published coordinates refer to the same neuroanatomical region. Specifically, the literature is populated with results in the form of MNI or Talairach coordinates, and their disparity can impede the comparison of results across different studies. This becomes particularly problematic in coordinate-based meta-analyses, wherein coordinate disparity should be corrected to reduce error and facilitate literature reviews. In this study, a quantitative comparison was performed on two corrections, the Brett transform (i.e., "mni2tal"), and the Lancaster transform (i.e., "icbm2tal"). Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data acquired during a standard paired associates task indicated that the disparity between MNI and Talairach coordinates was better reduced via the Lancaster transform, as compared to the Brett transform. In addition, an activation likelihood estimation (ALE) meta-analysis of the paired associates literature revealed that a higher degree of concordance was obtained when using the Lancaster transform in the form of fewer, smaller, and more intense clusters. Based on these results, we recommend that the Lancaster transform be adopted as the community standard for reducing disparity between results reported as MNI or Talairach coordinates, and suggest that future spatial normalization strategies be designed to minimize this variability in the literature.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Effect of Transform in ALE Meta-Analysis of Encoding
The ALE meta-analysis for encoding of paired associates was performed using Lancaster (icbm2tal; red) or Brett (mni2tal; green) transforms for spatial renormalization of MNI coordinates. Areas of overlap between the two meta-analyses are seen in yellow. This figure indicates that this choice has a substantial effect on coordinate-based meta-analyses. The Brett transform produced a nose-down correction, while the Lancaster transform produced a nose-up correction. Largest areas of difference occur in the superior and anterior regions of the brain, while areas of agreement are observed in the medial temporal cortices.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Brett M, Johnsrude IS, Owen AM. The problem of functional localization in the human brain. Nature Rev Neurosci. 2002;3:243–249. - PubMed
    1. Chau W, McIntosh AR. The Talairach coordinate of a point in the MNI space: How to interpret it. Neuroimage. 2005;25:408–416. - PubMed
    1. Collins DL, Neelin P, Peters TM, Evans AC. Automatic 3D intersubject registration of MR columetric data in standardized Talairach space. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1994;18:192–205. - PubMed
    1. Devlin JT, Poldrack RA. In praise of tedious anatomy. Neuroimage. 2007;37:1033–1041. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Eickhoff SB, Stephan KE, Mohlberg H, Grefkes C, Fink GR, Amunts K, Zilles K. A new SPM toolbox for combining probabilistic cytoarchitectonic maps and functional imaging data. Neuroimage. 2005;25:1325–1335. - PubMed

Paired Associates Meta-Analysis References

    1. Buckner RL, Raichle ME, Miezin FM, Petersen SE. Functional anatomic studies of memory retrieval for auditory words and visual pictures. J Neurosci. 1996;16:6219–6235. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cabeza R, McIntosh AR, Tulving E, Nyberg L, Grady CL. Age-related differences in effective neural connectivity during encoding and recall. Neuroreport. 1997;8:3479–3483. - PubMed
    1. Gould RL, Brown RG, Owen AM, Ffytche DH, Howard RJ. fMRI BOLD response to increasing task difficulty during successful paired associates learning. Neuroimage. 2003;20:1006–1019. - PubMed
    1. Haslband U, Krause BJ, Schmidt D, Herzog H, Tellmann L, Muller-Gartner HW. Encoding and retrieval in declarative learning: A positron emission tomography study. Behav Brain Res. 1998;97:69–78. - PubMed
    1. Halsband U, Krause BJ, Sipila H, Teras M, Laihinen A. PET studies on the memory processing of word pairs in bilingual Finnish-English subjects. Behav Brain Res. 2002;132:47–57. - PubMed

Publication types