Back

Dissecting origins of wiring specificity in dense cortical connectomes

Harth, P.; Udvary, D.; Boelts, J.; Baum, D.; Macke, J. H.; Hege, H.-C.; Oberlaender, M.

2024-12-15 neuroscience
10.1101/2024.12.14.628490 bioRxiv
Show abstract

What are the origins of the highly specific wiring patterns that are formed by the neurons in the brain? To address this question, we introduce a method to predict the empirically observed wiring diagram - the connectome - at synaptic resolution based on dense electron-microscopic reconstructions of neural tissue. Our method generates the connectome based on the morphological properties of the neurons in combination with synaptic specificity models, whose parameters capture how neurons wire conditional on their subcellular, cellular and cell type properties. We employ simulation-based Bayesian inference to identify all values for these parameters that can generate the observed connectome. Finally, for each synapse in a dense reconstruction, our method provides quantitative measures to reveal which synaptic specificity models are necessary, sufficient and best-suited to generate it. The output of our method are experimentally testable predictions of wiring preferences from subcellular to cell type levels that could account for each synapse in dense reconstructions. We demonstrate our method on dense datasets from mouse primary visual and human temporal cortex. Strikingly, this demonstration shows that just three assumptions, with nearly the same synaptic specificity values, predict the connectivity in both datasets. Our method is openly accessible as a computational framework that includes a comprehensive workflow for the analysis of wiring specificity, and which provides users with full flexibility to define and test their hypotheses. Our method sets the stage to uncover the principles by which neural networks are organized, and to compare these principles across brain areas, species and time points.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.