Table 1

Clusters showing significant differences between deprived Romanian adoptees and nondeprived United Kingdom adoptees in local white matter volumes (all p_FWE < 0.05)

Cluster index	Cluster size (mm³)	Hemi-sphere	T value	Max voxel MNI coordinates (mm)			Annotation
Cluster index	Cluster size (mm³)	Hemi-sphere	T value	x	y	z	Annotation
Nondeprived > deprived
1	12,460	L	6.43	−12	−23	−29	Brain stem
			6.28	−33	−17	−5	IFOF
			5.91	−33	−24	1	IFOF
			5.88	−33	−25	−1	IFOF
			5.48	−23	−17	−6	ILF
2	4760	R	4.58	33	−22	1	IFOF
			4.53	33	−22	−1	IFOF
			4.43	26	−33	9	IFOF
			4.28	29	−26	1	ILF
3	1791	L	4.56	−7	−47	17	Cingulum
			4.49	−12	−41	28	Cingulum
4	398	L	4.14	−34	−70	6	ILF
5	280	L	4.21	−9	−82	21	ILF
6	217	L	4.1	−41	−23	−13	ILF
7	140	L	4.78	−11	−67	47	ILF
8	117	L	3.8	−12	−57	51	Cingulum
9	98	L	3.37	−39	−37	33	SLF
10	97	L	3.86	−43	−35	−7	ILF
11	59	L	3.86	−31	−60	13	ILF
12	7	L	3.49	−37	−27	−16	ILF
Deprived > nondeprived
1	82	L	6.00	−32	−4	−16	Uncinate
Deprivation duration
No significant clusters
Subnutrition
No significant clusters

L, left; R, right; IFOF, inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus; ILF, inferior longitudinal fasciculus. Threshold-free cluster enhancement (TFCE) was applied and all analyses were controlled for family-wise error rate (FWE).