Retained spines with larger optical area had a 0.020 higher visual tuning repeat score in 13 mice when all distinct repeat pairs were used

Can optical spine size mark repeatable visual input? We tested 795 retained spine interval records from 22 cells in 13 young mice. Each date had eight stimulus directions and ten repeats. We compared size groups within fields and gave each mouse equal weight. We divided each tuning repeat product by its own total response energy. A common amplitude gain leaves this score unchanged. Larger spines had a mean score of 0.051, compared with 0.031 for smaller spines. The difference was 0.0199. The 95% mouse bootstrap interval was 0.0038 to 0.0376. A test of the first five repeats against the last five remained uncertain. Area growth had no clear link to score change. An added Gaussian error model gave all spines equal true neural tuning. Area-dependent optical error let this model match both observed group means. This fit is a counterexample, not a measured error law. Thus, the optical association does not identify a change in synaptic release reliability. We supply checked source rows, code, all results, figures, and repeat instructions. A fresh source rebuild matched both compact inputs. A full repeat matched all 43 numerical files.

dendritic spines · structure and function · visual cortex · calcium imaging · response repeatability · measurement error · synaptic reliability · open data