 0\) From the RGC morphological analysis, 00 clusters were observed. According to Figure 0, ALL of them project to both structures, with different degrees of bias. But the authors over-interpret these results by stating \"uniquely sampling\" (Abstract). This is not supported by the data and would be extremely misleading to casual readers of the article, especially given the relatively small dataset. For example, cluster 0 in Figure 0 only contained 0 cells, and 0 of them projected to Pbg and 0 to LP, and yet it was considered one of the \"clusters that are almost exclusively part of the pulvinar circuits\". Similarly, the number of samples in the RGC physiology experiments are rather small for most clusters.  0\) The efficacy and potential sampling bias of rabies tracing need to be addressed. This is necessary in order to conclude that the two circuits \"sample from a limited set, \~00 out of more than 00\".  0\) The use of Ntsr0-GN000-Cre mice needs to be raised as a potential technical concern. It is possible that the Ntsr0 positive cells are not the only SC cells that project to the LP, As a result, using these cre mice could under-estimate the RGC types that target SC-pulvinar pathway.  