ArticleBrain structure & function2025
Geometrical factors determining dendritic domain intersection between neurons: a modeling study.
Article in Brain structure & function, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Motor-to-Limbic Design of Direct Synaptic Communication between Dopamine Neurons in the Midbrain.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Modeling the structural basis of neuronal connectivity has advanced our understanding of organization and function of the nervous system. Research has focused on predicting synaptic connectivity from the geometry of intersecting axonal and dendritic trees. We extended this framework to examine how the dendritic domains of neighbouring neurons intersect, aiming to understand how shared afferences and projection system topography arise. We studied intersections in pairs of ventral tegmental area (VTA) dopaminergic neurons (n = 15; 105 pairs), as if in their actual brain locations, using intersection of their 3D convex hulls polyhedra (CHPs) as proxies of domain intersection. Proximity increased intersection probability, but substantial data spreading suggested additional factors. We hypothesized that similarities in domain volume, orientation, somatic eccentricity, and shape increase intersection too. After independently normalizing each factor based on a common value or structural principle, we found that eccentricity homogenization most strongly increased intersection and model accuracy. Combining normalization of two or more factors further enhanced both metrics, though effects were factor dependent; simultaneous normalization of eccentricity and shape produced the greatest increases. We replicated the analysis with nigral dopaminergic neurons and found eccentricity to be the strongest determinant of intersection. This result held when systematically spacing CHPs and when using α-shapes for closer representation of dendritic architecture. Interestingly, VTA CHP pairs intersected more than nigral pairs at equal distances, suggesting greater geometrical heterogeneity in the latter. These findings suggest that differences in neuronal geometry contribute to segregated connectivity in topographically arranged neural circuits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41081905What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.