Relationship between EPI variance line warning and voxel signal

Dear AFNI experts,

I have processed EPI data as shown in the afni_proc.py code below.
When I checked the results with QC, I got the EPI line variance warning as shown in the image.
In previous discussions, it was suggested that this EPI variance could be an issue with the MRI vendor. (The MRI I am using is a Siemens Magnetom Prisma 3T MRI).

My question is, can the subject's motion also cause these warnings?
The reason I came to this question is that when I processed data from subjects who performed the same task, I noticed differences in simple GLM results such as the move-rest contrast for each subject.

Also, I would like to get advice on whether these issues can be resolved by modifying the current preprocessing code, and if so, what modifications should be noted.

Thank you for your kind advice,
Yonghyun


AFNI version info (afni -ver): Precompiled binary linux_ubuntu_16_64: Mar 24 2024 (Version AFNI_24.0.17 'Caracalla')

#!/bin/zsh
## zsh s2-ii---.zsh -s (Pilot??) -d (1 or 2)
## ======================================= ##
## $# = the number of arguments
while (( $# )); do
	key="$1"
	case $key in
##		pattern)
##			sentence
##		;;
		-s | --subject)
			subj="$2"
		;;
		-d | --day)
			day="$2"
		;;
	esac
	shift ## takes one argument
done

echo $subj $day
## ======================================= ##

dir_root="/mnt/ext2/yonghyun/GAB_project/GAB_2024/fMRI_data"
dir_cvt="$dir_root/cvt_data/$subj"
dir_mask="$dir_root/mask_data"

## ======================================= ##

## I/O path, same as above, following earlier steps
dir_FreeSurfer="$dir_root/FreeSurfer"

if [[ ! -d $dir_Freesurfer ]]; then
	mkdir -p -m 755 $dir_FreeSurfer
fi

if [[ ! -d $dir_FreeSurfer/$subj ]]; then
	source /usr/local/freesurfer/7.2.0/SetUpFreeSurfer.sh
	export SUBJECTS_DIR=${dir_FreeSurfer}
	
	## FS function
	recon-all								\
		-sid		$subj					\
		-sd			$dir_FreeSurfer			\
		-i			$dir_cvt/T1.$subj.nii	\
		-all								\
	
	## AFNI-SUMA function: convert FS output
	@SUMA_Make_Spec_FS						\
		-NIFTI								\
		-fspath		$dir_FreeSurfer/$subj	\
		-sid		$subj

	3dQwarp -allineate -blur 0 3 										\
		-base "/usr/local/afni/abin/MNI152_2009_template_SSW.nii.gz"	\
		-source "$dir_FreeSurfer/$subj/SUMA/brain.nii.gz" 				\
		-prefix "$dir_FreeSurfer/$subj/SUMA/brain_qw.nii"
fi

## ======================================= ##
 
dir_output="$dir_root/proc_data/${subj}_${day}"
dir_script="/home/yonghyun/Ongoing/GAB_project/preprocessing/GAB2_afni_proc.py"

dsets=(`find $dir_cvt -type f -name "func.$day.r0?.$subj.nii" | sort -t ' ' -k 1`)

echo $dsets
cd $dir_script

afni_proc.py																					\
	-subj_id					$subj															\
	-out_dir					$dir_output														\
	-blocks						despike tshift align tlrc volreg blur mask scale regress		\
	-radial_correlate_blocks	tcat volreg														\
	-copy_anat					"$dir_FreeSurfer/$subj/SUMA/brain.nii.gz"						\
	-anat_has_skull				no																\
	-anat_follower				anat_w_skull anat "$dir_FreeSurfer/$subj/SUMA/T1.nii.gz"		\
	-anat_follower_ROI			aaseg anat														\
								"$dir_FreeSurfer/$subj/SUMA/aparc.a2009s+aseg_REN_all.nii.gz"	\
	-anat_follower_ROI			aeseg epi														\
								"$dir_FreeSurfer/$subj/SUMA/aparc.a2009s+aseg_REN_all.nii.gz"	\
	-anat_follower_ROI			FSvent epi "$dir_FreeSurfer/$subj/SUMA/fs_ap_latvent.nii.gz"	\
	-anat_follower_ROI			FSWe epi "$dir_FreeSurfer/$subj/SUMA/fs_ap_wm.nii.gz"			\
	-anat_follower_erode		FSvent FSWe														\
	-dsets						$dsets															\
	-tcat_remove_first_trs		0																\
	-blip_forward_dset			$dir_cvt/func.$day.r01.$subj.nii								\
	-blip_reverse_dset			$dir_cvt/func.$day.reverse.$subj.nii							\
	-align_unifize_epi			yes																\
	-align_opts_aea																				\
	-cost						lpc+ZZ															\
	-giant_move																					\
	-resample					off																\
	-check_flip																					\
	-tlrc_base					MNI152_2009_template_SSW.nii.gz									\
	-tlrc_NL_warp																				\
	-volreg_align_to			MIN_OUTLIER														\
	-volreg_align_e2a																			\
	-volreg_tlrc_warp																			\
	-volreg_warp_dxyz			2.0																\
	-blur_size					4																\
	-mask_epi_anat				yes																\
	-regress_motion_per_run																		\
	-regress_ROI_PC				FSvent 3														\
	-regress_ROI_PC_per_run		FSvent															\
	-regress_make_corr_vols		aeseg FSvent													\
	-regress_anaticor_fast																		\
	-regress_anaticor_label		FSWe															\
	-regress_censor_motion		0.4																\
	-regress_censor_outliers	0.05															\
	-regress_apply_mot_types	demean deriv													\
	-html_review_style			pythonic

Hi Honghyun,

Indeed, having such vertical patches at the front is not indicative of any problem, but often leads to a warning. Those images look fine.
See this thread with variance line images for other images. The first image row shows what seem to be real variance lines. The rest, not really.

  • rick