Role of interstitial branching in the development of visual corticocortical connections: A time‐lapse and fixed‐tissue analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We combined fixed-tissue and time-lapse analyses to investigate the axonal branching phenomena underlying the development of topographically organized ipsilateral projections from area 17 to area 18a in the rat. These complementary approaches allowed us to relate static, large-scale information provided by traditional fixed-tissue analysis to highly dynamic, local, small-scale branching phenomena observed with two-photon time-lapse microscopy in acute slices of visual cortex. Our fixed-tissue data revealed that labeled area 17 fibers invaded area 18a gray matter at topographically restricted sites, reaching superficial layers in significant numbers by postnatal day 6 (P6). Moreover, most parental axons gave rise to only one or occasionally a small number of closely spaced interstitial branches beneath 18a. Our time-lapse data showed that many filopodium-like branches emerged along parental axons in white matter or deep layers in area 18a. Most of these filopodial branches were transient, often disappearing after several minutes to hours of exploratory extension and retraction. These dynamic behaviors decreased significantly from P4, when the projection is first forming, through the second postnatal week, suggesting that the expression of, or sensitivity to, cortical cues promoting new branch addition in the white matter is developmentally down-regulated coincident with gray matter innervation. Together, these data demonstrate that the development of topographically organized corticocortical projections in rats involves extensive exploratory branching along parental axons and invasion of cortex by only a small number of interstitial branches, rather than the widespread innervation of superficial cortical layers by an initially exuberant population of branches.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".