It's important to realize what the study tells us, and equally what it does not tell us. We need to remember that differences in hardwiring do not necessarily mean differences in function. By way of a crude analogy, the pattern of logic gates in a circuit in a microprocessor made by Intel will differ significantly from those in a microprocessor made by a competitor - yet the outputs may be identical. Precisely because the human brain has so many potential ways of wiring up, we can assume that a very significant percentage result in the same fundamental outputs. Were this not the case, we would be unable to function as a group species.

So while it is clear that environment strongly influences the specifics of neural hardwiring, we can also deduce that the phase-spaces are such that the net effect (resulting from millions of potential connections in the human brain) turns out in aggregate to mask the underlying differences most of the time. Thus one can use the very same data from the c elegans study to make the counter-argument: that hardwiring dominates environmental effects due to the aggregation of outputs within a neural phase-space. Even in c elegans, the differences between the worms' behaviors were far smaller than the overall similarities.

We need to be careful not to read too much into studies, especially when we know it's all too easy to see what we want to see and exclude alternative explanations.