phenomenon · claim-type · cross-domain-transfer · mechanism · claim-relation · replication-status · limitation — grounded in the full text| phenomenon | long-range connectivity of the mouse posterior parietal cortex— “Although many recent works have been performed with the mouse as a model system, a comprehensive understanding of long-range connectivity of the mouse PPC is scarce, preventing integrative interpretation of the rapidly accumulating functional data.” | |
| claim-type | existence— “In this study, we summarized the quantitative long-range connectivity from and to the PPC by analyzing the Allen Mouse Brain Connectivity Atlas data and confirmed key findings by both anterograde and retrograde neurotracers.” | |
| method — evidence | — “In this study, we conducted a detailed neuroanatomic and bioinformatic analysis of the Allen Mouse Brain Connectivity Atlas data to summarize afferent and efferent connections to/from the PPC.” | |
| mechanism | Absence of a direct visual-to-motor cortical route forces visual decision signals through PPC, so inactivating PPC impairs visual but not whisker-based decisions— “There is essentially no direct connection between VIS and MO (Wang et al. 2012) and the main indirect connection from VIS to MO is through the PPC (Zingg et al. 2014).” | mechanisms[0] |
| mechanism | Reciprocal PPC-thalamic loops sustain persistent choice-selective firing during a delay— “The current study showed that the PPC has a strong reciprocality with LP, PO, and LD, suggesting the possibility that the reciprocal connectivity with thalamic nuclei may be a general connectivity motif that supports the persistent activity.” | mechanisms[1] |
| mechanism | Tracing and axon-volume quantification disagree because one reports where cell bodies sit and the other where synapses land— “For instance, when L5 neurons receive inputs on their distal dendrites, an experimental approach will show L5, where cell bodies are located, whereas bioinformatic analysis will show L1, where the synapses occur.” | mechanisms[2] |
| builds-on | Oh et al. 2014; Harris et al. 2019 (brain-wide quantitative projection analyses)— “The same method has been used in previous brain-wide quantitative analyses of projection patterns (Oh et al. 2014; Harris et al. 2019), and thus was used in this study for comparative analysis of inputs to/outputs from PPC.” | claim_relations[0] |
| builds-on | Zingg et al. 2017 (AAV1 transsynaptic anterograde tracing)— “Taking advantage of AAV1, which is a widely used anterograde tracer with transsynaptic potential (Zingg et al. 2017), in combination with reporter mouse line (Gt(ROSA)26Sortm9(CAG-tdTomato), Ai9), we selectively labeled the neuronal cell bodies that receive VISa inputs.” | claim_relations[1] |
| extends | the rat connectivity record in BAMS (Brain Architecture Management System)— “We also observed inputs from LGd, VPL, VPM and VAL in mice, which were not reported in rats (no reported data in BAMS).” | claim_relations[2] |
| contradicts | prior rat reports of a zona incerta (ZI) projection to VISrl— “It has been reported in rats that light projections from the ZI to the VISrl exist, however, we found no clear evidence of projections to the PPC (see Supplementary Figs 9 and 10k).” | claim_relations[3] |
| sense | the PPC's borders - TWO DELINEATIONS THAT DISAGREE: there is a weak consensus on anatomical borders, and the paper reports that functional retinotopic mapping did not clearly define the boundaries or mismatched the architectonic definition, so the region has two methods of fixing it and they do not agree— “However, it has been reported that even with functional retinotopic mapping by intrinsic optical imaging, using voltage-sensitive dyes or Ca2+ responses, the boundaries of VISa and VISrl were not clearly defined or mismatched with the architectonic definition of the PPC” | senses[0] |
| sense | a selected injection - ONE OF THREE TIERS: preference is for injections occupying over 90% of the primary structure, falling back to 75-90% and then 50-75% where nothing passed, so the phrase 'representative injection' covers three grades of evidence and the result does not say which— “For cortical areas, injections with the primary injection structure occupying over 90% of total injection volume (considered a very well positioned injection—tier 1) were selected. If no injection passed this criterion, then the injections with the next highest primary injection ratio (75–90%—tier 2) were selected, followed by tier 3… | senses[1] |
| sense | a false-positive attribution - A CORRECTION WITHOUT ITS EVIDENCE: a printed projection signal is attributed to quantification of a fibre path rather than a terminal field, and the reader is asked to discount the result on that basis— “The projection signal in CA3 appears to have resulted from a false positive quantification from the path through the ventral part of the internal capsule and then the cerebral peduncle” | senses[2] |
| control | injections that fill the entire LD or LP, or non-overlapping subregional targeting - NOT achieved, and the paper says the comparison cannot be made without them — absent-declared-unreported — rules out an apparent mouse-versus-primate species difference in thalamic connectivity that is really a difference in where the tracer landed— “Only after precise controlling for injection location, other variables may be explored.” | controls[0] |
| differs in | functional retinotopic mapping —contrasted-with→ architectonic definition — where each places the boundary: the functional maps were not clearly defined or did not match the architectonic one— “However, it has been reported that even with functional retinotopic mapping by intrinsic optical imaging, using voltage-sensitive dyes or Ca2+ responses, the boundaries of VISa and VISrl were not clearly defined or mismatched with the architectonic definition of the PPC” | concept_edges[0] |
| outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation) | control — absent-declared-unreported | controls[0] |
| for which use | limitation — every result reported for mouse PPC, and every join on that label: THE PPC IS A RELATIVELY SMALL BRAIN REGION WITH A WEAK CONSENSUS ON ANATOMICAL BORDERS IN THE MOUSE BRAIN— “This leaves a potential problem considering that the PPC is a relatively small brain region with a weak consensus on anatomical borders in the mouse brain.” | limitations[0] |
| for which use | limitation — the regional coverage of the atlas: A RELATIVELY LIMITED NUMBER OF INJECTIONS FOR EACH STRUCTURE ... CAN RESULT IN INCOMPLETE COVERAGE OF THE BRAIN REGIONS, WHICH MAY DISPLAY A HIGH LEVEL OF INTRAREGIONAL VARIABILITY— “First, a relatively limited number of injections for each structure in the connectivity dataset can result in incomplete coverage of the brain regions, which may display a high level of intraregional variability.” | limitations[1] |
| for which use | limitation — any synaptic reading of the projection patterns: THE DETECTED SIGNAL IS PRIMARILY BASED ON AXONAL STRUCTURE INSTEAD OF SYNAPTIC INPUTS PER SE— “However, detailed projection patterns need to be interpreted with care since the detected signal is primarily based on axonal structure instead of synaptic inputs per se.” | limitations[2] |
| for which use | limitation — the apparent mouse-rat thalamic difference: AS LD AND LP INJECTIONS ... DID NOT FILL THE ENTIRE LD OR LP, THE COMPLETE REGIONAL INJECTIONS OR ADDITIONAL NONOVERLAPPING SUBREGIONAL TARGETING ... ARE REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE A TRUE SPECIES DIFFERENCE— “As LD and LP injections examined in this study did not fill the entire LD or LP, the complete regional injections or additional nonoverlapping subregional targeting of mouse LD and LP are required to demonstrate a true species difference.” | limitations[3] |
| for which use | limitation — any boundary assigned to mouse PPC: even with functional retinotopic mapping using intrinsic optical imaging, voltage-sensitive dyes or Ca2+ responses, the boundaries of VISa and VISrl were not clearly defined or mismatched with the architectonic definition— “However, it has been reported that even with functional retinotopic mapping by intrinsic optical imaging, using voltage-sensitive dyes or Ca2+ responses, the boundaries of VISa and VISrl were not clearly defined or mismatched with the architectonic definition of the PPC” | limitations[4] |
| for which use | limitation — any comparison of projection strengths between structures here: injections occupying over 90% of the primary structure were preferred, with fallback to 75-90% and then 50-75% where none passed— “For cortical areas, injections with the primary injection structure occupying over 90% of total injection volume (considered a very well positioned injection—tier 1) were selected. If no injection passed this criterion, then the injections with the next highest primary injection ratio (75–90%—tier 2) were selected, followed by tier 3… | limitations[5] |
| for which use | limitation — the CA3 projection signal reported here: the authors state it appears to have resulted from a false positive quantification from the path through the ventral internal capsule— “The projection signal in CA3 appears to have resulted from a false positive quantification from the path through the ventral part of the internal capsule and then the cerebral peduncle” | limitations[6] |
| for which use | limitation — any connection matrix read from this paper: only connections above threshold are shown, and the threshold is not the same for cortical and thalamic structures— “Only strong connections above threshold (0.1 for cortical and 0.05 for thalamic structures) are shown in a color scale” | limitations[7] |
| replication | untested | |
| limitation | The PPC is small and its anatomical borders are weakly agreed on in mouse, so injection targeting could be imprecise.— “This leaves a potential problem considering that the PPC is a relatively small brain region with a weak consensus on anatomical borders in the mouse brain.” | limitations[0] |
| limitation | Few injections were available per structure in the atlas dataset, giving incomplete regional coverage.— “First, a relatively limited number of injections for each structure in the connectivity dataset can result in incomplete coverage of the brain regions, which may display a high level of intraregional variability.” | limitations[1] |
| limitation | The quantified signal is axonal, not synaptic, so laminar projection patterns must be read cautiously.— “However, detailed projection patterns need to be interpreted with care since the detected signal is primarily based on axonal structure instead of synaptic inputs per se.” | limitations[2] |
| limitation | The LD and LP injections did not fill those nuclei, so the apparent mouse-rat thalamic difference is not yet established.— “As LD and LP injections examined in this study did not fill the entire LD or LP, the complete regional injections or additional nonoverlapping subregional targeting of mouse LD and LP are required to demonstrate a true species difference.” | limitations[3] |
| limitation | Two ways of delineating the same region are reported not to match.— “However, it has been reported that even with functional retinotopic mapping by intrinsic optical imaging, using voltage-sensitive dyes or Ca2+ responses, the boundaries of VISa and VISrl were not clearly defined or mismatched with the architectonic definition of the PPC” | limitations[4] |
| limitation | Injection quality varies by structure because selection falls back through three tiers.— “For cortical areas, injections with the primary injection structure occupying over 90% of total injection volume (considered a very well positioned injection—tier 1) were selected. If no injection passed this criterion, then the injections with the next highest primary injection ratio (75–90%—tier 2) were selected, followed by tier 3… | limitations[5] |
| limitation | A printed result is withdrawn as an artefact on evidence the paper does not show.— “The projection signal in CA3 appears to have resulted from a false positive quantification from the path through the ventral part of the internal capsule and then the cerebral peduncle” | limitations[6] |
| limitation | The threshold for showing a connection differs between structure classes.— “Only strong connections above threshold (0.1 for cortical and 0.05 for thalamic structures) are shown in a color scale” | limitations[7] |
finding · quantity · variable · definition · key-term — grounded in the full text| finding | The mouse posterior parietal cortex sends its heaviest cortical output to secondary motor cortex, primary visual cortex and the barrel field of primary somatosensory cortex.— “The PPC predominantly projected to secondary motor, primary visual, and the barrel field of the primary somatosensory cortex (MOs, VISp, and SSp-bfd; Figs 2 and 3).” | content_tags.findings[0] |
| finding | PPC output to the thalamus is concentrated in three associative nuclei, LP, PO and LD.— “Strong PPC projections were found in the associative thalamic regions, LP, PO, and LD.” | content_tags.findings[1] |
| finding | The heaviest inputs to the PPC come from ipsilateral secondary motor, auditory and visual cortex plus primary somatosensory cortex.— “The largest inputs arise from ipsilateral secondary cortical regions (motor, auditory, and visual) and the primary somatosensory region (Fig. 5).” | content_tags.findings[2] |
| finding | Within the hypothalamus, moderate PPC projections appeared almost exclusively in the zona incerta.— “Within the hypothalamus, moderate projections from the PPC appeared almost exclusively in the ZI, for both VISa and VISrl” | content_tags.findings[3] |
| finding | What separates PPC from neighbouring visual cortex is that it gets more multimodal spatial input and less primary visual input.— “In summary, the enhanced multimodal spatial input and decreased primary visual input distinguishes the PPC from adjacent regions of the visual cortex.” | content_tags.findings[4] |
| finding | The strongest reciprocal cortical partners of PPC are MOs, SSp-bfd, VISal, VISam and VISpm.— “In the cortex, MOs, SSp-bfd, VISal, VISam, and VISpm showed the greatest mutual connection, for which pairs both VISa and VISrl showed the projection strength above the threshold (Fig. 11a,b).” | content_tags.findings[5] |
| finding | The strongest reciprocal thalamic partners of PPC are LP, PO, LD and PF.— “In the thalamus, LP, PO, LD, and PF were found to have the strongest reciprocal connections (Fig. 11c,d).” | content_tags.findings[6] |
| finding | Neuromodulatory input to PPC is dominated by cholinergic fibres, with weaker serotonergic and histaminergic input.— “In summary, there was a distinct cholinergic input to the PPC, with much lighter serotonergic and histaminergic inputs to the PPC; patterns were similar in adjacent regions.” | content_tags.findings[7] |
| finding | The posterior thalamic nucleus projects topographically, its dorsomedial neurons reaching VISa and its lateral neurons reaching VISrl.— “Dorsomedial PO neurons projected to VISa, whereas neurons in lateral portion of PO projected to VISrl almost exclusively (Fig. 9c,d).” | content_tags.findings[8] |
| finding | Compared with rats, mice have lighter LD and LP projections to PPC, while ventrobasal (VPL, VPM) and LGd input appears lightly but clearly in mice. | content_tags.findings[9] |
| finding | The greatest mouse-rat difference in PPC projection was in the infralimbic area. | content_tags.findings[10] |
| finding | Top-down cortical inputs from ILA and ACAd and higher-order thalamic input from VAL and PO terminate mainly in layer 1 of PPC. | content_tags.findings[11] |
| finding | Overall the mouse PPC connectome closely resembles the rat's, with a minority of clear species differences. | content_tags.findings[12] |
| quantity | N = 2556 — number of published atlas injection experiments that passed the standard-labelling screen and entered the analysis | content_tags.quantities[0] |
| quantity | 214 — unique primary injection sites, one per brain structure, from which afferents to PPC were inferred | content_tags.quantities[1] |
| quantity | 173 — representative injections selected for the noncortical (subcortical) structures | content_tags.quantities[2] |
| quantity | 0.97 ± 0.03 — Pearson correlation of the top 25 projection targets between the chosen VISp representative injection and 13 alternative injections Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[3] |
| quantity | 0.1 for cortical and 0.05 for thalamic — normalized-projection-volume thresholds a connection had to exceed to be shown in the reciprocality analysis Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[4] |
| variable | injection coordinates (independent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[0] |
| variable | projection strength (dependent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[1] |
| variable | injection volume (covariate) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[2] |
| definition | normalized projection volume Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[0] |
| definition | injection volume Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[1] |
| definition | robustness of labeling (R) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[2] |
| definition | inclusiveness of projection targets (I) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[3] |
| definition | representative score (S) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[4] |
| definition | reciprocality Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[5] |
| definition | bilaterality Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[6] |
| definition | virtual retrograde map Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[7] |
| concept | functional retinotopic mapping Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[0] |
| concept | architectonic definition Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[1] |
| concept | primary injection structure Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[2] |
| concept | false positive quantification Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[3] |
| concept | strong connections above threshold Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[4] |
| correlation | as written: Pearson correlation Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[0] |
| standard deviation sd | as written: mean and standard deviation Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[1] |
| mean | as written: mean projection strength Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[2] |
When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.
Tag layer © the Meta-Tagging Project, CC BY 4.0. The paper text is © its authors/publisher
and is linked, not reproduced. Excerpts shown are short quotations for identification and verification.
· back to index
· concepts · authors
· עברית
© 2026 Shir Sivroni · ORCID 0009-0000-2597-2824