{
"papers": [
{
"n": 94,
"doi": "10.1038/nature09880",
"value": "Cochran–Armitage trend p = 0.040",
"method": "paired patch-clamp",
"metric": "P(connection) trend with ΔOri",
"n_analyzed": "94",
"ci_or_error": "p = 0.040",
"text_access": "fulltext",
"n_definition": "orientation-selective potential pairs",
"scope_region": "mouse V1 L2/3",
"study_system": "Mouse V1 L2/3 pyramidal cells",
"taxonomic_level": "broad excitatory subclass",
"scope_population": "orientation-selective pairs",
"value_source_sentence": "Connectivity rate decreased with increasing difference in orientation preference (P = 0.040, Cochran-Armitage test for trend,).",
"experimental_conditions": "in vitro paired patch + in vivo 2P"
},
{
"n": 26,
"doi": "10.1038/nature14182",
"value": "1.38 mV vs 0.12 mV",
"method": "paired patch-clamp",
"metric": "Median EPSP amplitude (correlated > 0.2 vs < 0)",
"n_analyzed": "26",
"ci_or_error": "Wilcoxon p = 6.8 × 10⁻⁵",
"text_access": "fulltext",
"n_definition": "connected pairs partitioned by response correlation",
"scope_region": "mouse V1 L2/3",
"study_system": "Mouse V1 L2/3 pyramidal cells",
"taxonomic_level": "broad excitatory subclass",
"scope_population": "connected pyramidal pairs",
"value_source_sentence": "Importantly, response correlation was closely related to EPSP amplitude: the strongest connections were found between neuronal pairs with the highest response correlations (;), while neurons with negatively correlated responses tended not to connect or formed only weak connections (response correlation > 0.2, median amplitude of connected pairs: 1.38 mV,= 10; response correlation < 0, median amplitude: 0.12 mV,= 16;= 6.8 × 10, Wilcoxon rank-sum test;).",
"experimental_conditions": "in vitro paired patch + in vivo 2P"
},
{
"n": 201,
"doi": "10.1038/nature17192",
"value": "0.55 ± .003 vs 0.50 ± .009 null",
"method": "EM connectomic",
"metric": "Network modularity (preferred-orientation grouping)",
"n_analyzed": "201",
"ci_or_error": "permutation p ≈ 0",
"text_access": "fulltext",
"n_definition": "connected-core neurons (degree ≥ 2)",
"scope_region": "mouse V1 L2/3",
"study_system": "Mouse V1 L2/3 EM reconstruction",
"taxonomic_level": "broad excitatory subclass",
"scope_population": "EM-reconstructed pyramidal network",
"value_source_sentence": "Modularity in the reconstructed network was significantly higher than would be expected by chance (= 0.55 ± .003 vs. 0.50 ± .009, mean ± SD,≈ 0, Permutation test;and, see Methods) and was not a consequence of higher order motifs ().",
"experimental_conditions": "EM + in vivo 2P"
},
{
"n": 1,
"doi": "10.1038/s41586-025-08840-3",
"value": "Graded positive association",
"method": "EM connectomic + digital-twin features",
"metric": "Functional similarity vs synaptic density",
"n_analyzed": "1",
"ci_or_error": null,
"text_access": "fulltext",
"n_definition": "all ADP-controlled pairs in MICrONS proofread subset",
"scope_region": "mouse VISp + HVAs",
"study_system": "Mouse VISp + AL/LM/RL",
"taxonomic_level": "broad excitatory subclass",
"scope_population": "all functionally responsive proofread cells",
"value_source_sentence": "Specifically, higher-than-average rates of synaptic density (synapses per unit) were associated with higher-than-average functional similarity, again in a graded fashion.",
"experimental_conditions": "EM dense reconstruction + digital twin features"
}
],
"audit_issues": [
{
"dimension": "metric_definition",
"description": "Statistics are different across rows: ΔOri trend p-value (Ko 2011), median EPSP amplitude by response correlation (Cossell 2015), network modularity Q (Lee 2016), functional-similarity vs. synaptic-density gradient (MICrONS). Cannot be plotted on a single scalar axis.",
"entries_affected": [
"10.1038/nature09880",
"10.1038/nature14182",
"10.1038/nature17192",
"10.1038/s41586-025-08840-3"
]
},
{
"dimension": "scope_region",
"description": "MICrONS spans V1 + 3 higher visual areas across layers; the older studies are V1 L2/3-only.",
"entries_affected": [
"10.1038/s41586-025-08840-3"
]
}
],
"audit_verdict": "CAVEAT",
"comparison_id": "like-to-like-mouse-V1-E-to-E",
"comparison_name": "Like-to-like excitatory connection rule across mouse V1 paired-recording and EM studies",
"comparison_type": "convergent evidence",
"what_it_reveals": "Three generations of mouse-cortex methods (paired patch, small-EM, MICrONS dense EM) independently converge on a like-to-like wiring rule among V1 excitatory pyramidal cells, with the rule expressed through synapse number/density, EPSP amplitude, and network modularity.",
"homogeneity_check": {
"caveats": [
"MICrONS (08840-3) spans V1 + 3 higher visual areas, whereas the older studies are V1-only.",
"Metrics differ: ΔOri trend (09880), EPSP amplitude (14182), network modularity (17192), feature-similarity gradient (08840-3) — all probe the same underlying rule but cannot be directly averaged."
],
"n_definition_uniform": "false",
"scope_region_uniform": "false",
"taxonomic_level_uniform": "true",
"scope_population_uniform": "false"
},
"suggested_plot_type": "forest plot",
"mandatory_caption_caveats": [
"Four different statistics (trend p, EPSP by correlation, modularity Q, similarity-density gradient) probe the same like-to-like rule and are not directly averageable.",
"MICrONS row covers V1 + higher visual areas including feedback; the older rows are V1 L2/3 only."
]
}