Ten annotated presynaptic sites join PD2 and PV5 olfactory target groups in one fly hemibrain at endpoint scores of at least 0.5
We tested whether olfactory outputs to cell groups with different measured response dynamics have separate presynaptic sites. We selected 33 projection neuron bodies and 17 target bodies from the fixed Kim et al. (2025) dataset. We then joined outgoing and incoming synapse annotations in the public hemibrain GCS v1.2 export. A site was an exact presynaptic coordinate within one source cell. Both endpoint scores had to be at least 0.5, and presynaptic x had to be less than 80 micrometres. The retained graph had 1,046 contacts at 1,016 sites and 16 target bodies. Ten sites contacted both PD2 and PV5 groups. DM1 and DM4 each supplied four sites; DP1m and VM3 each supplied one. A separate annotation-ID lookup confirmed all 20 contacts and their distinct postsynaptic points. Eight shared sites remained for LHPD2a1 and LHPV5a1_a alone. At a minimum endpoint score of 0.8, three broad-group sites and one narrower-class site remained. A repeat analysis of ten paired recordings from other flies gave a third response above the first in six PV5 recordings and below the first in four PD2 recordings. The anatomy gives counterexamples to complete separation of the selected output sites. It does not establish shared vesicle release or the dynamics of any individual site. This is one selected brain subset, and most retained sites contacted only one group. The package preserves the site inventory, response extracts, two figures, source generations and hashes, code, direct annotation records and checked repeat instructions.
Drosophila · olfaction · hemibrain · polyadic synapse · short-term plasticity · structure and function · data provenance
References
4- usesdoi:10.5281/zenodo.15625190
Uses the fixed version 1 cell-selection table, source coordinate lists and ten paired DM1-LHN recordings. Original source code remains external.
- supportsdoi:10.1016/j.cub.2025.05.051
The new inventory supports the reported lack of complete spatial separation of outputs. A response reanalysis confirms its initial group distinction; it does not test individual-site dynamics.
- usesdoi:10.7554/eLife.57443
Uses the hemibrain reconstruction through the public GCS v1.2 synapse export. Exact object generations and range-response hashes specify the data version.
- Target pairs at shared synapse sites had higher activity scores under 2 micrometre count controls in two adult C. elegans maps sci:sha256:c1fca56b41d5319793529f402e16cdc87b77ba352de6f76b32e0c89f1afb1c15
Related prior work connects shared presynaptic sites to activity in C. elegans and explains why site grouping alone does not establish common release. No code or data are reused.
Cited by
5 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesWith full initial pools and 1 ms steps, changing release order raised fitted recovery from 1.79 to 5.04 s in six fly olfactory recording pairs
We reuse its cached source files and source receipt. We check their hashes and make a separate extraction and model comparison. Its shared-site anatomy gives circuit context.
- Separate target tables cut response error by 29% in ten fly recordings at 5 Hz after one gain fit per recording
This prior study found shared presynaptic sites for these target groups and repeated an initial response comparison. Our new analysis tests transfer to excluded recordings and table compression.
- usesIndependent release gave a PD2–PV5 order bound in ten fly records with equal quanta, no noise and site CV≤3. Three separate omissions removed it.
We checked our independent extraction against its verified 372-response table. It did not estimate the release order bounds tested here.
- Geometric target weights reduced blocked selective 50% output cuts from 261 to 101 of 486 connections in one adult worm model at baseline release probability 0.5
This earlier work reports shared fly sites for target groups with different response dynamics. We instead bound selective direct output changes in a worm release model.
- With fixed trial order, 13 fly recordings showed different PD2–PV5 response contrasts between two odor orders after 20 s conditioning.
This earlier site inventory provides a structural comparison for the same target groups. It does not test the present odor-order interaction.