Sorry I don't understand. I'm trying to decide the advantages between 35mm and 4x5.

If you are looking at equal DoF
I am looking at equal DOF between the two formats...I want to have my entire subject sharp, if possible.

and equal relative image size
The final prints between the two formats will be the same.

then there is no advantage to format in macro photography (1x or greater)
Ok, that's what I thought but I'm still not so sure.

Consider 3 scenarios:

Consider my little seed pod I'm photographing; it's about golf-ball-size and roughly spherical.

1. Say I'm using a 4x5 camera and I set it up 1:1 so the image of the seed pod is 1-inch (life-size) on the 4x5 film. I adjust my aperture to get 1/4 inch of DOF. Then when I print I enlarge the negative until seed pod to 10-inches wide on the print, and crop the print to 11x14.

2. Say I'm using a 4x5 camera and I set it up 4x magnification so that the seed pod is 4 inches wide on the film. I adjust my aperture until the DOF is 1/4 inch, same as before. Then I enlarge the negative until the seed pod is 10-inches wide on the print, and crop the print to 11x14.

3. Say I'm using a 35mm camera and I set it up .25x magnification so that the seed pod is 1/4 inches on the negative. I adjust the aperture until the DOF is 1/4 inches. Then I enlarge the negative until it's 10-inches wide on the print, and crop the print to 11x14.

What differences in results can I expect? Theory predicts that I will have to use the smallest aperture for scenario 2, correct? Ignoring things like film grain, reciprocity and light issues, what differences can I expect the prints to have?