Surely interesting, indeed in our study we are not saying cytoarchitectonic isn't at all predictive of any differentiation (I guess it also depends on the regions ), but more specifically that an integration with connectional data could provide more info on the localization of functional properties

Posted it on the reply above, as I said it's very interesting that we also saw that connectional borders enabled to find a functional organization which would not have been evident by only using cytoarchitectonic ones, especially in the intermediate part of the region we studied

journals.plos.org/plosbiology/... here is the study, the borders you can see in this study were performed by matching cytoarchitectonic to connectional data, and we found very interesting evidence pointing towards a functional differentiation between the areas we identified

This is the most interesting point in my opinion, given that in a recent study from the lab I'm working in ,we reached a very similar conclusion considering monkey PFC

I think it's very interesting that we are focusing our attention on the direct involvement of prefrontal areas in guiding actions within our everyday behavioral context

Each area differently contributes to the encoding of visual features and to the exploitation of contextual information for guiding behavior. A summary view of the findings in the figure below (5/5)

The actual execution or withholding of grasping actions predominantly activates neurons in the intermediate VLPF areas, particularly in middle 46v. This indicates that these areas, may primarily contribute to action selection and guidance (4/5)

The passive presentation of visual stimuli primarily activates neurons in the caudal VLPF areas, especially in caudal 12r. This suggests that these areas, consistently with their strong connections with the inferotemporal cortex, represent the first VLPF stage of visual processing (3/5).

The coding of different task phases and the behavioral rule is observed across all recorded areas, indicating a distributed representation of these processes within VLPF, which is in line with the strong interconnection among prefrontal areas (2/5)

Finally, decoding analyses on the neural activity show that each VLPF area has a shared neural code across specific epochs of the visuomotor task, suggesting that each area plays a distinct role in encoding the contextual information relevant for behavior (5/5).

Demixed principal component analysis (dPCA) of neural activity reveals that each subdivision of VLPF is characterized by distinct functional features related to the encoding ofboth the task rule (behavioral condition) and the type of stimulus (4/5).

The execution or withholding of grasping actions predominantly activates neurons in the intermediate VLPF areas, which could contribute to the selection and guidance of contextually appropriate actions, in line with their strong connections to the parietal and premotor cortices (3/5).

The passive presentation of visual stimuli primarily activates neurons in the caudal VLPF areas. This suggests that these regions represent the first VLPF processing stage of visual input, consistent with their strong connections to the inferotemporal cortex (2/5)

The passive presentation of visual stimuli primarily activates neurons in the caudal VLPF areas. This suggests that these regions represent the first VLPF processing stage of visual input, consistent with their strong connections to the inferotemporal cortex (2/5)