The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Curry software

Manufactured by Compumedics
Sourced in United States

Curry software is a data analysis and visualisation tool developed by Compumedics. It is designed to process and display data from a variety of laboratory equipment, including neurophysiological and polysomnographic devices.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

10 protocols using curry software

1

Mapping Electrode Locations for Brain Activity Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The locations of the electrodes were identified on the basis of images registered between preoperative T1 MRI data and postoperative three‐dimensional computed tomography data using the FMRIB software library (http://www.frmib.ac.uk/fsl). The locations of each electrode were transformed into the Talairach coordinate system using Curry software (Compumedics, Charlotte, NC) and projected onto the template brain provided by the Montreal Neurological Institute (Fig. 2). The total number of electrodes was 528 and Table 2 displays the number of electrodes included in each area. The fractional change in oscillatory power in each of the five frequency bands was calculated for each electrode and the change in power was displayed using a color map. We did not include the delta band in this study due to the small time epoch.
A nearest‐neighbor method was used to construct the color map. A cortical triangular mesh was colored relative to the statistical significance level of the closest electrode and the color faded as the distance between the mesh and the closest electrode increased [Englot et al., 2010; Youngblood et al., 2013]. The process of the analysis is illustrated in Figure 3.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Multimodal Imaging for Electrode Localization

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Each subject had post-operative anterior-posterior and lateral radiographs, as well as computer tomography (CT) scans to verify grid locations. Three-dimensional cortical models of individual subjects were generated using pre-operative structural magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. These MR images were co-registered with the post-operative CT images using Curry software (Compumedics, Charlotte, NC, USA) to identify electrode locations. Cortical activation maps were generated using custom Python software.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Preprocessed ECoG Data Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
ECoG data were recorded with a 128-channel amplifier system (Neuroscan). Signals were digitized at 1000 (for Subject #1) or 2000 Hz and were band-pass filtered at 0.1–200 or 0.1–500 Hz, respectively. ECoG channels which show epileptiform activities and abnormal signals due to technical problems were excluded from further analysis. The recorded data were re-referenced to the common average reference (CAR). To remove systematic noise at 60 Hz and related harmonics, the signals were notch-filtered with a finite impulse response (FIR) filter using the eegfilt function in the EEGLAB toolbox. Epoching was performed with a window of –1 to 3 s of stimulus onset. For the localization of the ECoG electrodes, co-registrations between preoperative MRI and postoperative CT images were performed semi-automatically with the CURRY software (version 7.0; Compumedics Neuroscan).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Current Density Estimation for TMS-Induced Components

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Current densities for the representing time points of TMS-induced components were estimated by using the standardized low resolution brain electromagnetic tomography [(sLORETA), Pascual-Marqui et al., 2002 (link)] in the Curry software (version 6.0.20, Compumedics Neuroscan, Victoria, Australia) for the illustrative purposes. Current density estimations were analyzed for each group separately and the visualized time points were defined as local maximum values of GMFP. The EEG data and the digitized locations of EEG electrodes were combined with a realistic head model [a three-compartment boundary element model and standard conductivity values (0.33 S/m for the brain fluid, 0.0042 S/m for skull, and 0.33 S/m for skin)] for current source analysis (Ferreri et al., 2016 (link)).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Locating Electrode Positions on 3D Brain Model

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Each subject had post-operative anterior–posterior and lateral radiographs (Figure 4), as well as computer tomography (CT) scans to verify ECoG grid locations. Three-dimensional cortical models of individual subjects were generated using pre-operative structural magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. These MR images were co-registered with the post-operative CT images using Curry software (Compumedics, Charlotte, NC) to identify electrode locations. Electrode locations were assigned to Brodmann areas using the Talairach Daemon (http://www.talairach.org, (Lancaster et al., 2000 (link)). Activation maps computed across subjects were projected on this 3D brain model, and were generated using a custom Matlab program (Gunduz et al., 2012 (link)).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Automated Anatomical Localization of Intracranial Electrodes

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The locations of the contacts relative to brain anatomy were determined by co-registering the preoperative MRI of the brain with the head CT scan for SEEG electrode locations and CT scan for RNS electrode locations. We have recently developed a semi-automated identification process of anatomical labelling for intracranial electrode contacts, details of which are described in Tayler et al.52 (link) In brief, the preoperative MRI of each patient was imported to BrainSuite53 (link) and an anatomical segmentation was performed based on the USCBrain atlas.54 (link) The SEEG contacts locations are determined from the CT using the Curry software (Compumedics, NeuroScan Laboratories, Charlotte, NC, USA), and the outputs are combined to localize and automatically assign anatomical labels to each contact. The contact locations of RNS were identified in the same manner. The distances between each SEEG and each RNS contact were calculated using an in-house MATLAB script (the Mathworks, Inc., Natick, MA, USA). BrainSuite53 (link) and BrainStorm software55 (link) were used to confirm the locations of the contacts of SEEG and RNS electrodes within the brain volumes.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Foreign-Accented Speech Perception EEG Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Continuous EEG data were recorded using Curry software (Version 7; Compumedics Ltd., USA) from 64 Ag/AgCl scalp electrodes mounted on an electrode cap (Easycap, Brainworks, GmbH) according to the International 10–10 system [41 ] (Fpz, Fz, FCz, Cz, CPz, Pz, Oz, Fp1/2, AF7/3/1/2/4/8, F7/5/3/1/2/4/6/8, FT7/8, FC5/3/1/2/4/6, T7/8, C5/3/1/2/4/6, M1/2, TP7/8, CP5/3/1/2/4/6, P7/5/3/1/2/4/6/8, PO7/5/3/4/6/8, O1/2). Ground was located at AFz. Electrooculographic activity was measured from electrodes placed above and below the right orbit and at the outer canthus of each eye. Electrode impedances were kept below 10kΩ. Electrical activity was recorded from both mastoids, with the left mastoid as the on-line reference. The EEG signal was digitised at a sampling rate of 1000 Hz and filtered with a .05–100 Hz bandpass filter using a Neuroscan SynAmps2 DC Amplifier (Compumedics Ltd., USA).
The EEG recording lasted between one and one and a half hours for each participant, including breaks. After the EEG recording, participants completed a post-task questionnaire in which they were asked to rate the strength of the foreign-accented speaker’s accent on a seven-point scale from ‘No foreign accent’ (1) to ‘Very strong foreign accent’ (7), and to identify the nationality of the foreign-accented speaker. In all, the testing session for each participant lasted approximately two and a half hours.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

3D Cortical Brain Modeling and Electrode Mapping

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We created subject-specific 3D cortical brain models for subjects A, C, D and E using high-resolution pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans and Curry software (Neuroscan Inc., El Paso, TX). MRI scans were not available for subject B. Instead, for visualization purposes, we used the 3D cortical template by the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI)1. To identify the stereotactic coordinates of each grid electrode, we co-registered the MRI scans with post-operative computer tomography (CT) images. Finally, we projected each patient’s electrode locations onto the corresponding 3D brain model and rendered activation maps using the NeuralAct software package (Kubanek and Schalk, 2014 (link)).
For the macaque, the assignment of electrodes to cortical areas was based on high-resolution intra-operative photographs taken before and after grid placement, and used primarily sulcal landmarks.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Mapping Functional Brain Regions from Intracranial Electrodes

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We used Curry software (Neuroscan, El Paso, TX) to create subject-specific three-dimensional (3D) cortical brain models from high-resolution pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. We co-registered the MRIs with post-operative CT images and extracted, for each grid electrode, the stereotactic coordinates and functional area according to the Talairach atlas (Lancaster et al., 2000 (link)). We used the 3D cortical template provided by the MNI to display aggregate electrode locations from multiple subjects onto a common coordinate space. Finally, we projected electrodes onto subject-specific brain models to render activation maps using our NeuralAct software package (Kubanek and Schalk, 2014 (link)). Briefly, to compute activation maps, the activation index value for each electrode location was spatially convolved with a linear decay spatial kernel whose value reached zero at the interelectrode distance (10 mm in this study). Thus, maps are the result of linear interpolations at locations between the electrodes.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Mouse Brain EEG Source Localization

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
EEG source estimations (Fig. 1d) were performed using CURRY software (ver 7, Neuroscan Inc., Herndon, VA). To reconstruct the equivalent dipole sources of the measured EEG, we built a volume conduction model with boundary element method using images downloaded from the open database of the Magnetic Resonance Microimaging Neurological Atlas Group (http://brainatlas.mbi.ufl.edu/Database). Averaged magnetic resonance images based on the C57BL/6J mouse atlas database were used for the model. Details of the volume conduction model were described in the work of Lee et al. (2013b) (link) and a Matlab based toolbox is available in FieldTrip (http://www.fieldtriptoolbox.org/tutorial/mouse_eeg). For the response to single-pulse stimulation, EEG traces between 15 and 30 ms after light onset were averaged over all trials and used for dipole fitting. For repetitive optogenetic stimulation, EEG traces during the stimulation period were averaged over the trials at a particular stimulation frequency. The source was estimated with eLORETA algorithm and time-averaged source strength was superimposed with the MRI.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!