At this point we asked whether the information on the value of th

At this point we asked whether the information on the value of the odor conveyed by the synchronized firing trains diverged between the two odors at a time in the trial before the

animal made a decision. We performed principal component (PC) analysis of divergent synchronized pair responses to the odors. Figure S3A shows, for the first and best blocks, the time course for the responses to odors PD0332991 research buy in 2D PC space, and Figure S3B shows the time course of the Euclidean distance in PC space between the points for the rewarded and unrewarded odors. There is clear divergence of the responses to the odors in the best block, but not in the first block. Figure 4C shows the p value for a ranksum test of divergence of the Euclidean distance between rewarded and unrewarded odors. Divergence of synchronized unit firing becomes significant at ∼1 s (0.7 s after addition of the odor), which is ∼0.25 s earlier than the time at which the animals make a decision to stop licking to the unrewarded odor (1.25 s, estimated with a ranksum test on licks). A fraction of a second afterward at ∼1.7 s, the mice change their sniff frequency (Figure 1Bii). BIBF 1120 mw Thus, the divergence between rewarded and unrewarded odors for synchronized trains carries

information that the animal can use for odor discrimination. We next asked whether analysis of trials where the animals made mistakes shows that synchrony reflected responses to odor, and not responses that mirrored the behavioral action. In other words, when the animal makes a mistake and licks on the water tube to obtain a reward why when exposed to the unrewarded odor (false alarm), are the synchronized spike trains more like the synchronized firing that takes place when the animal

correctly licks for a water reward to a rewarded odor (hit), or more like the synchronized responses when the animal correctly does not lick for the unrewarded odor (correct rejection)? As shown by the z-score cumulative histograms in Figure 5, the synchronized spiking decreased (Δz < 0) in response to the unrewarded odor, regardless of whether the animal licked during this odor (false alarm, green) or not (correct rejection, black). Similarly, for the majority of the trials, synchronized firing increased (Δz > 0) in response to the rewarded odor whether the animal licked during this odor (hit, blue) or refrained from licking (miss, red). Thus, the odor-induced changes in synchronized firing are responses to the odor as opposed to responses that follow the animal’s behavior or licking. In addition, because the responses follow the odor presented rather than the movement the animal made, the data in this figure indicate that the synchronized spike trains are not brought about by noise caused by the animal’s movements. The percent of unit pairs whose synchronized spike trains respond differentially to the odors decreased as a function of distance between electrodes (Figure 6A, blue).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>