The critique of Barth et al centers on three points: (i) the completeness of our study is overstated; (ii) the connectivity matrix we describe is biased by technical limitations of our brain-slicing and multipatching methods; and (iii) our cell classification scheme is arbitrary and we have simply renamed previously identified interneuron types. We address these criticisms in our Response.
Copyright © 2016, American Association for the Advancement of Science.