  The various types of retinal neurons are each positioned at their respective
depths within the retina where they are believed to be assembled as orderly
mosaics, in which like-type neurons minimize proximity to one another. Two
common statistical analyses for assessing the spatial properties of retinal
mosaics include the nearest neighbor analysis, from which an index of their
"regularity" is commonly calculated, and the density recovery profile derived
from auto-correlation analysis, revealing the presence of an exclusion zone
indicative of anti-clustering. While each of the spatial statistics derived
from these analyses, the regularity index and the effective radius, can be
useful in characterizing such properties of orderly retinal mosaics, they are
rarely sufficient for conveying the natural variation in the self-spacing
behavior of different types of retinal neurons and the extent to which that
behavior generates uniform intercellular spacing across the mosaic. We consider
the strengths and limitations of different spatial statistical analyses for
assessing the patterning in retinal mosaics, highlighting a number of
misconceptions and their frequent misuse. Rather than being diagnostic criteria
for determining simply whether a population is "regular", they should be
treated as descriptive statistics that convey variation in the factors that
influence neuronal positioning. We subsequently apply multiple spatial
statistics to the analysis of eight different mosaics in the mouse retina,
demonstrating conspicuous variability in the degree of patterning present, from
essentially random to notably regular. This variability in patterning has both
a developmental as well as a functional significance, reflecting the rules
governing the positioning of different types of neurons as the architecture of
the retina is assembled (abstract truncated).
