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. W e will address Barth et al.'s (1) three critiques of our Research Article (2) in turn.(i) The strength of our study is the number of connections tested (>11,000) in one species, cortical area, and age range, using the same experimental protocol. We agree that our study is not exhaustive, because it is focused on synaptic connectivity between interneurons in layers 1, 2/3, and 5, and we point this out in the abstract of the original paper. However, we do believe that no single study to date has presented a more complete wiring diagram of the adult neocortical microcircuit.(ii) Severed connections are a well-known limitation of slice recordings, which we discussed explicitly on p. 3 of the supplementary materials (SM) for (2). However, we do not agree that our study is substantially more susceptible to connection loss than previous patching studies, most of which also used 300-to 350-mm slices [we found fewer than half a dozen multipatching studies using 450-to 500-mm slices (3-5)]. Although cell depth is not reported in many of these studies, the depths at which we recorded (15 to 60 mm) seem typical (6). We patched cells at a wide range of intersomatic distances [see fig. S13A in (2)]; this range reflects the sparsity of labeled interneurons and is not a limitation of octuple patching.Like many previous studies, we used currentclamp mode to measure connectivity, which suffers less distance-dependent voltage attenuation compared with voltage clamp (7). Using potassium internal solution allowed us to characterize spiking properties and test bidirectional connectivity, whereas cesium-based internal solutions would prevent the patched neuron from firing. We discussed potential problems of voltage attenuation [SM for (2), p. 9], such as the underestimation of synaptic event amplitudes and potential nondetection of small synaptic events on the distal dendrites [e.g., connections from Martinotti cells onto layer 5 (L5) pyramidal neurons].To directly address Barth et al.'s concern that the connectivity matrix may be distorted due to slice cutting, we simulated the effect of slicing based on interneuron morphology (8) (Fig. 1A) [see also (6)] for the worst-case scenario where two neurons (pre-and postsynaptic) are both located 15-mm deep from the cutting surface. The resulting correction factor was similar across pairs of cell types (Fig. 1B), more or less scaling the entire connectivity matrix by a factor of 1.36 ± 0.10 (mean ± SD) (Fig. 1, C and D). Given these results and the fact that our connectivity principles mostly rely on the presence or absence of connectivity between specific types regardless of its magnitude, we believe ...