| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition, Mellon Institute; and Department of Neuroscience, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Submitted 19 January 2005; accepted in final form 27 March 2005
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONGRANTSACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONGRANTSACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
; Kalivas and Nakamura 1999; Mogenson et al. 1980; Ono et al. 2000). The limbic system is crucial for the initial stage of evaluating rewards (Roesch and Olson 2004; Tremblay and Schultz 1999, 2000). The transition from evaluating a reward to initiating action in pursuit of it is thought to depend on structures interposed functionally between the limbic system and motor system. Areas that may play a role in this transition include the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (PFC), the frontal eye field (FEF), the supplementary eye field (SEF), the premotor cortex (PM), and the supplementary motor area (SMA). Neuronal activity in all of these areas is influenced both by the nature of the action the monkey is planning and by the value of the reward to which it will lead (Coe et al. 2002; Hikosaka and Watanabe 2000; Hikosaka et al. 1989; Kobayashi et al. 2002; Leon and Shadlen 1999; Matsumoto et al. 2003; Roesch and Olson 2003; Wallis and Miller 2003; Watanabe 1990, 1992, 1996; Watanabe et al. 2002). Thus it makes sense to think of them as a potential watershed between limbic evaluative functions and motor output.
The PFC, FEF, SEF, PM, and SMA are thought to serve a variety of functions with cognitive, oculomotor, and skeletomotor components. It would be surprising, for that reason, if reward-related activity took the same form or had the same significance in all of them. To test for possible differences among these areas with respect to the nature of reward-related activity, we recently carried out a comparative study in which we recorded from neurons in all of them while monkeys performed a memory-guided saccade task in which a cue presented early in each trial indicated whether the reward delivered on successful completion of the trial would be large or small (Roesch and Olson 2003). We found that the tendency for neurons to fire more strongly when a large reward was expected substantially increased as the recording site moved posteriorly (from PFC to FEF to PM in the lateral frontal lobe and from SEF to SMA in the medial frontal lobe).
The pattern of interareal differences observed in the previous study was of interest because it cast light on the possible significance of reward-related activity. This might either 1) represent the value of the anticipated reward in the service of an economic decision process or 2) reflect motivational modulation of the state of motor preparation, motor output, arousal, or attention. To distinguish definitively between these possibilities is not possible in experiments that manipulate only the value of the predicted reward because, under this manipulation, perceived value and motivational state are correlated (Maunsell 2004; Roesch and Olson 2004). Nevertheless, in light of the fact that reward-related activity was strongest by far in PM and SMA, which is to say in motor areas, the second interpretation, based on motivational modulation of the monkey's preparatory state, carries greatest weight.
We were concerned that these results might be specific to manipulations of value based on reward size. To address this issue, we devised an alternate approach in which the size of the reward was the same on every trial but the monkey was informed by an early cue whether the delay before delivery of the reward would be long or short. It is well known that inserting a longer anticipated delay before an anticipated reward reduces its perceived value, a phenomenon known as time-discounting (Lowenstein and Elster 1992). We report here that varying the delay before delivery of a constant reward had very much the same effect on neuronal activity as varying the size of a reward delivered at a constant delay. In particular, the tendency for neurons to fire more strongly after a cue that predicted a short delay was much more robust in areas behind the arcuate sulcus (FEF/PM, PM, and SMAr) than in areas in front of it (PFC, FEF, and SEF).
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONGRANTSACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Four adult male rhesus monkeys were used (Macaca mulatta; laboratory designations N, P, A, and F). Experimental procedures were approved by the Carnegie Mellon University Animal Care and Use Committee and were in compliance with the guidelines set forth in the United States Public Health Service Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.
Preparatory surgery
At the outset of the training period, each monkey underwent sterile surgery under general anesthesia maintained with isofluorane inhalation. The top of the skull was exposed, bone screws were inserted around the perimeter of the exposed area, a continuous cap of rapidly hardening acrylic was laid down so as to cover the skull and embed the heads of the screws, a head-restraint bar was embedded in the cap, and scleral search coils were implanted on the eyes, with the leads directed subcutaneously to plugs on the acrylic cap (Robinson 1963). After initial training, recording chambers were implanted into the acrylic. At each selected site, a 2-cm-diameter disk of acrylic and skull was removed. A cylindrical recording chamber was cemented into the hole with its base just above the exposed dural membrane.
Chambers were placed either at a medial location (over SEF and SMAr) or at a lateral location (over PFC, FEF, FEF/PM, and PM). Recording was carried out from a medial chamber in monkeys A, N, and F; a left lateral chamber in monkey P; and a right lateral chamber in monkeys F and N. The medial chambers placed over SEF and SMAr were centered on the midline of the brain approximately 21 mm anterior to the Horsley–Clarke interaural plane. The lateral chambers placed over PFC, FEF, and PM were centered approximately at anterior 23 mm and lateral 23 mm.
Memory-guided saccade task
The aim of this task was to allow initial characterization of the spatial selectivity of each neuron. The monkeys performed memory-guided saccades to six targets forming a hexagonal array at an eccentricity of 10° (Fig. 1A). Each trial began with the monkey's fixating a central spot. At 500 ms after attainment of fixation, the six targets appeared. After an additional 300 ms a cue was presented for 250 ms in superimposition on one of the targets. After a random delay in the range of 500 to 1,000 ms, the fixation spot was extinguished, whereupon the monkey had to make a saccade directly to the previously cued target. Trials involving the six targets were interleaved in random order subject to the constraint that each block of six successful trials had to contain one trial involving each target. Testing continued until it was possible to identify the target eliciting maximal activity. Subsequent testing in other tasks involved this target and the one diametrically opposite with respect to the fixation point (Fig. 1A: 1 and 1', 2 and 2', or 3 and 3').
|
The monkeys performed a memory-guided saccade task in which a cue presented early in the trial predicted a short (500 ms) or a long (2,500 ms) delay period. Essential features of the task are summarized in Fig. 1. Each trial began with onset of a central fixation spot (Fig. 1B1). At a time 50 ms after attainment of fixation, the spot was transformed to a cue the shape and color of which signified the length of the upcoming delay period (Fig. 1C1). After 400 ms two targets appeared (Fig. 1D1) at diametrically opposed locations. A directional cue identical to the fixation cue except in size was then presented for 250 ms in superimposition on one of the targets (Fig. 1E1). After a 500 ms (or 2,500 ms) delay period (Fig. 1F1), the fixation spot was extinguished (Fig. 1G1), whereupon the monkey was required to make a saccade directly to the previously cued target (Fig. 1H1) and to maintain fixation on it for 300–450 ms after saccade completion until delivery of a juice reward (Fig. 1I1). The intertrial interval after a correct trial was set to 1,000 ms whereas, after an error, either a fixation break or a wrong choice, it was set to 5,000 ms. There were four conditions representing all possible combinations of delay length (short or long) and direction (preferred or antipreferred). The conditions were interleaved in random order subject to the constraint that one trial conforming to each condition had to be completed successfully before initiation of the next block of trials. Because of this constraint, no long-term advantage attached to breaking fixation on an undesirable (long-delay) trial. The rejected condition would simply be presented repeatedly until a trial was successfully completed. To prevent confounding activity related to delay length with selectivity for the visual properties of the cues, the cue convention was reversed after each block of 40 successful trials. The collection of data from a given neuron commonly continued until 80 trials had been completed successfully.
Stimuli in the variable-delay task
The fixation spot was a 0.38° white square presented at the center of the screen. Targets were 0.38° white squares presented 10° from central fixation. The central delay cues, which spanned 0.96°, were a red square and a blue circle. The directional cue shared all of the properties of the foveal delay cue with the exception that it spanned 1.32°. The background of the display had a luminance of 1.5 cd/m2 and CIE x and y chromaticity coefficients of 0.26 and 0.26. White stimuli had a luminance of 126.5 cd/m2 and CIE x and y chromaticity coefficients of 0.28 and 0.32. Red stimuli had a luminance of 112.5 cd/m2 and CIE x and y chromaticity coefficients of 0.27 and 0.61. Blue stimuli had a luminance of 110.2 cd/m2 and CIE x and y chromaticity coefficients of 0.15 and 0.17.
Variable-reward task
Many of the neurons studied in the context of the variable-delay task were also studied in the context of the variable-reward task. In the variable-reward task, the delay was fixed at 1,500 ms, whereas the cue at the beginning of the trial predicted a big (0.3 ml) or small (0.1 ml) juice reward. Essential features of the task are summarized in Fig. 1. For further details of task design, see Roesch and Olson (2003). Data collected in the context of the variable-reward task were considered in a previous paper concerned with that task (Roesch and Olson 2003). Here, we consider data from the variable-reward task solely in connection with the question whether neurons sensitive to delay length were also sensitive to reward size.
Order of tasks
Neuronal activity was first monitored in the context of the memory-guided saccade task with reward size and delay length fixed and with targets at six locations spaced at 60° intervals around fixation (Fig. 1A). Any neuron appearing to exhibit task-related activity in this task was selected for study in the variable-delay task and the variable-reward task. In these tasks, the possible target locations were confined to the neuron's preferred direction (as determined in the memory-guided saccade task) and the opposite direction. The order in which the two tasks were run alternated across sessions. Some neurons were studied in the context of only one of the tasks because recording instability or satiation of the monkey prevented running both.
Single-neuron recording
At the beginning of each day's session, a varnish-coated tungsten microelectrode with an initial impedance of several megohms at 1 kHz (Frederick Haer, Bowdoinham, ME) was advanced vertically through the dura into the immediately underlying cortex. The dura was debrided at intervals commonly spanning a few months to ensure penetrability by the electrode. The electrode could be placed reproducibly at points forming a square grid with 1-mm spacing (Crist et al. 1988). The action potentials of a single neuron were isolated from the multineuronal trace by means of an online spike-sorting system using a template-matching algorithm (Signal Processing Systems, Prospect, Australia). The spike-sorting system, on detection of an action potential, generated a pulse the time of which was stored with 1-ms resolution.
Electromyographic measurements
Adhesive surface electrodes were placed on the shaved skin overlying the right splenius capitus and masseter muscles. The voltage threshold was set as low as possible subject to the constraint that the voltage did not cross threshold at rest. Muscle activity was stored as time-marked records of threshold crossings. From these, we constructed histograms representing the mean instantaneous threshold-crossing rate as a function of time during the trial under each condition.
Experimental control and data collection
All aspects of the behavioral experiment, including presentation of stimuli, monitoring of eye movements, monitoring of neuronal activity, and delivery of reward, were under the control of a Pentium-based computer running Cortex software provided by R. Desimone, Laboratory of Neuropsychology, National Institute of Mental Health. Eye position was monitored by means of a scleral search coil system (Riverbend Instruments, Birmingham, AL). The X and Y coordinates of eye position were stored with 4-ms resolution. Stimuli generated by an active matrix LCD projector were rear-projected on a frontoparallel screen 25 cm from the monkey's eyes.
Analysis of the dependency of behavior on delay length
We used paired t-tests to compare, across sessions, the session means of the following measures obtained on short-delay versus long-delay trials: reaction time, error rate, and fixation-break rate. Reaction time was defined as the delay from offset of the fixation spot to the moment when the eye left the central fixation window. Error rate was defined as the number of trials on which a saccade was directed to the wrong target expressed as a percentage of all trials on which a saccade was directed to either target. Fixation-break rate was defined as the percentage of all trials on which the eye left the central fixation window at any time before offset of the fixation spot.
Analysis of the dependency of firing rate on task factors
We used two-factor ANOVAs to analyze the dependency of the firing rate of each neuron on delay length and response direction. We independently analyzed data from seven trial epochs: 1) from delay cue onset to directional cue onset (700 ms), 2) from onset to offset of the directional cue (250 ms), 3) 250 ms beginning with directional cue offset, 4) 250 ms before fixation spot offset, 5) 200 ms before saccade initiation, 6) from saccade onset to 100 ms after saccade completion, 7) 100 ms before to 100 ms after initiation of reward delivery. In all tests, the criterion for statistical significance was taken as P 
0.05.
Assessing contribution of reaction time to activity related to delay length
To determine whether neuronal activity continued to depend on delay length when the effects of behavioral reaction time were factored out, we performed a multivariate regression analysis, fitting three models
1) Y = a0 + a1RT
2)Y = a0 + a2DELAY
3)Y = a0 + a1RT + a2DELAY
where Y is the firing rate measured from onset of the delay cue to offset of the fixation spot and RT is the behavioral reaction time. The variable DELAY was set to 1 or 0 for trials with short or long delays, respectively. To determine whether adding the variable DELAY produced a significant improvement in performance, we compared model 3 to model 1. To determine whether adding the variable RT produced a significant improvement, we compared model 3 to model 2. Significance was assessed with an F-test using
 |
0.05. Localization of recording sites
To characterize the location of the recording sites relative to gross anatomical landmarks, we projected the sites onto structural magnetic resonance (MR) images (Fig. 2). The images were collected by use of a Bruker BioSpin 4.7 T magnet in which the anesthetized monkey was supported by an MR-compatible stereotaxic device. Fiducial marks made visible by means of a contrast agent included the centers of the ear bars and selected locations inside the recording chamber. Frontoparallel 2-mm-thick slices spanning the entire brain were collected. In addition, 2-mm-thick slices were collected parallel to the cortical surface underlying each lateral chamber. To determine the location of recording sites relative to functional divisions of cortex, we mapped out regions under each chamber from which motoric responses (eye, face, and limb movements) could be elicited at low threshold (40 µA) by electrical microstimulation (1.65-ms biphasic pulses delivered through the recording microelectrode at a frequency of 300 Hz in 200-ms-long trains).
|
, 2000). Supplementary eye field (SEF): a region, located rostral to the genu of the arcuate sulcus and extending 2–5 mm from the hemispheric midline, in which microstimulation elicited saccades. Rostral supplementary motor area (SMAr): a region immediately caudal to the SEF in which microstimulation elicited movements of the face and limbs. |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONGRANTSACKNOWLEDGMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
In the following sections, we will describe the impact of delay length on behavior and neuronal activity in PFC, FEF, FEF/PM, PM, SEF, and SMAr. At each stage of analysis, we will consider (first) effects related to anticipated delay and (second) effects related to elapsed delay. We will examine the impact of anticipated delay by comparing short-delay to long-delay trials during epochs aligned on the delay-predicting cue and preceding the moment at which, in short-delay trials, the signal to respond was given. We will examine the impact of elapsed delay by comparing short-delay to long-delay trials during epochs near in time to the response and aligned on response initiation. The analyses concerned with anticipated and elapsed delay involve comparing roughly identical periods of neuronal activity, as observed on short-delay trials, to nonoverlapping early and late periods of activity, as observed on long-delay trials. Thus the two analyses are not entirely independent. However, as will be seen, they reveal qualitatively different effects.
Behavior: anticipated delay
To analyze the impact of anticipated delay on behavior we assessed how fixation breaks were distributed across time during the early part of the trial under short- versus long-delay conditions. The results, shown in Fig. 3C, indicate 1) that fixation breaks were more frequent under long- than under short-delay conditions and 2) that the tendency to break fixation declined over the course of the trial under both conditions. To determine whether the impact of anticipated delay length was significant, we compared the fixation-break frequencies (number of trials prematurely terminated by cessation of fixation expressed as a percentage of all trials) observed under short- and long-delay conditions in each monkey during the first 1,000 ms beginning at the presentation of the delay cue (Fig. 3D). This analysis epoch spans a period in which equivalent events occurred at equivalent times on short- and long-delay trials, with the only difference between them ascribed to anticipation. The tendency for fixation breaks to occur more often in anticipation of a long delay was present and significant in every monkey (two-tailed paired t-test, P < 0.05) and was highly significant in data collapsed across monkeys (P < 0.001). We conclude that the monkeys were less motivated to perform the task when anticipating a long delay than when anticipating a short delay.
|
We will refer to effects occurring at the end of the trial (and revealed by comparing measures from short- and long-delay trials taken around the time of the behavioral response) as related to "elapsed delay." This is an expositional tool; it does not imply that the effects were a direct consequence of elapsed delay. There is no sure way of establishing whether effects present at the time of the response depended on the monkey's experiencing the antecedent delay or, alternatively, were a result of the monkey's having been put by the delay cue into a state that persisted until the end of the trial. With this qualification, we note that behavioral measures taken at the end of the trial were sensitive to the duration of the antecedent delay. This was evident in two behavioral measures computed for every neuronal data collection session. The error rate (percentage of trials when the incorrect target was selected relative to all trials when one target or the other was selected) was lower on short-delay (0.6%) than on long-delay (2.0%) trials (Fig. 3A). This trend was present in data from every monkey, achieving significance (two-tailed paired t-test, P < 0.05) in three out of four of them (Fig. 3D), and was highly significant in data collapsed across all monkeys (P < 0.0001). The average behavioral reaction time was faster on short-delay (233 ms) than on long-delay (248 ms) trials (Fig. 3B). This trend was present and achieved significance (two-tailed paired t-test, P < 0.05) in three out of four monkeys (Fig. 3D), and was highly significant in data collapsed across all monkeys (P < 0.0001). These results indicate that monkeys were in a state of heightened preparation (reflected by a simultaneous improvement of accuracy and speed) after a short delay as compared to a long delay.
Neuronal data analysis: anticipated delay
To determine whether neuronal activity was influenced by the length of the anticipated delay, we compared neuronal activity occurring before the imperative command (offset of the fixation spot) on short-delay trials to neuronal activity occurring during the identical period (at the end of which the fixation spot remained on) on long-delay trials. Neurons in many frontal areas exhibited activity related to the length of the expected delay. This activity commonly took the form of a main effect (with the net firing rate higher or lower on short-delay trials) and less frequently took the form of an interaction effect (with the strength of the directional signal stronger or weaker on short-delay trials). For the neurons illustrated in Fig. 4, A and B, the net firing rate during the "anticipated-delay" comparison period (time-locked to delay-cue onset and highlighted in yellow) was higher on short-delay trials (top row for each neuron) than on long-delay trials (bottom row for each neuron).
|
Neuronal data analysis: elapsed delay
On examination of histograms representing the activity of single neurons, it was evident that the firing rate at the end of the delay period, around the time of the saccade (epoch highlighted in green in Fig. 4), could differ according to whether the antecedent delay had been long or short. The neuron of Fig. 4A clearly fired more strongly at the end of a short than at the end of a long delay. In contrast, on trials requiring a response in the preferred (leftward) direction, the neuron of Fig. 4B fired more strongly at the end of a long delay. To analyze the nature and rate of incidence of effects dependent on elapsed delay, we will proceed through three steps of analysis. 1) Population histograms. These depict activity during a 1,500 ms epoch beginning 500 ms before saccade initiation (righthand column in Figs. 5– 9). The beginning of this epoch coincides with a point in time about 250 ms after offset of the directional cue on short-delay trials and 2,250 ms after offset of the directional cue on long-delay trials. 2) Individual neurons by epoch. We will consider whether firing rate depended on delay length or its interaction with response direction during late epochs of the trial, including epoch IV (250 ms before fixation spot offset), epoch V (200 ms before saccade initiation), epoch VI (from saccade onset to 100 ms after saccade completion), and epoch VII (from 100 ms before to 100 ms after initiation of reward delivery). 3) Individual neurons across a long premovement epoch. To obtain one robust statistical measure for each neuron, to facilitate comparison across areas, we will determine whether the firing rate of each neuron depended significantly on delay length or its interaction with response direction during a long epoch beginning 250 ms before the imperative cue (offset of the fixation spot) and ending with saccade initiation.
|
|
POPULATION. We collected data from 204 neurons in the PFC of two monkeys (Table 1). As a basis for qualitative assessment of the effect of anticipated delay on the activity of these neurons, we constructed population curves representing firing rate as a function of time under the four trial conditions (Fig. 5A). Population histograms shown to the left (Fig. 5A1) represent activity subject to influence by the duration of the anticipated delay. In these displays, aligned on cue onset, thick and thin lines represent population activity on trials requiring responses in the preferred and antipreferred directions, respectively. Neuronal activity was strongly affected by response direction as indicated by the consistent elevation of thick above thin lines after appearance of the directional cue. Effects of anticipated delay length would be manifest as differences in firing rate between trials in which the response direction (indicated by line thickness) was the same but expected delay length (indicated by color) was different. It is evident from the close coincidence of red and blue curves that the impact of anticipated delay on firing rate was weak. To characterize the time course of activity modulated by anticipated delay length, we independently computed indices reflecting 1) the impact of expected delay length on net firing rate independent of direction and 2) the impact of expected delay length on the strength of the directional signal. The impact on net firing rate was measured with an index representing the average amount by which the firing rate increased under the short-delay condition. It was computed as (SP + SA – LP – LA)/2, where SP is the firing rate under the short-delay, preferred-direction condition; LA is the firing rate under the long-delay, antipreferred-direction condition; and so on. The impact of anticipated delay length on firing rate was variable over time and negligible in strength (Fig. 5B1). The effect of delay on the directional signal was represented by an index that corresponded to the average amount by which short-delay caused the difference in firing rate between preferred-direction and antipreferred-direction trials to increase. It was computed as (SP – SA – LP + LA)/2. This index hovered around zero before the directional signal and then became slightly positive (Fig. 5D1).
|
Main effect of delay.
Counts of neurons exhibiting a significant main effect of delay length on firing rate are shown in Fig. 5C1, where blue (or red) symbols represent the percentage of cases in which firing was increased (or decreased) for short compared with long delay trials. During each epoch (I–III), the full count of neurons exhibiting a main effect of delay (whether this took the form of significantly stronger or significantly weaker firing under the short-delay as compared with the long-delay condition) was significantly in excess of the frequency (0.05) expected by chance from type 1 errors (
2 test, P < 0.05). This observation can be reconciled with the observation that there was little effect of delay on the average activity of the neuronal population (as indicated in the population histogram) by noting that neurons increasing and decreasing their firing rate on short-delay trials were equally common, so that the effects canceled at the population level. During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons firing more strongly and those firing more weakly before a short delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
Counts of neurons exhibiting a significant interaction effect are shown in Fig. 5E1, where blue (or red) symbols represent the percentage of cases in which the directional signal was stronger (or weaker) on short-delay trials. Counts during epoch I necessarily represent type 1 errors because it was only after this epoch that the directional cue appeared. During epoch III, the proportion of neurons exhibiting an interaction effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger direction selectivity and those exhibiting weaker direction selectivity before a short delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS ACROSS A LONG ANTICIPATORY EPOCH. To generate for each neuron a single statistical measure of the impact of predicted delay length on the neuronal firing rate, we carried out an ANOVA using, as the dependent variable, the mean firing rate across the entire period from onset of the delay cue to 250 ms after offset of the directional cue, taking as factors both expected delay length and instructed response direction. The results are presented in Table 1 and Fig. 11.
|
2 test, P < 0.05). The difference in frequency between neurons firing more strongly and those firing more weakly before a short delay was not significant (2 test, P > 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
Interaction effects were no more common than expected by chance (2 test, P > 0.05). The difference in frequency between cases in which direction selectivity was stronger before a short delay and those in which it was weaker was not significant (2 test, P > 0.05). These results did not differ significantly between monkeys.
SUMMARY. Among PFC neurons, the length of the anticipated delay exerted a subtle influence on firing rate. A few neurons fired more strongly and a few more weakly in anticipation of a short delay.
Prefrontal cortex (PFC): elapsed delay
POPULATION. In curves representing the population firing rate as a function of time, it is evident that activity was enhanced after a long delay as compared to a short delay (Fig. 5A2). This was true both when the response was in the neuron's preferred direction (the thick red curve lies above thick blue curve) and when it was in the opposite direction (the thin red curve lies above the thin blue curve). The enhancement was present before saccade initiation but was most marked after the saccade (downward-directed red regions in the difference histogram of Fig. 5B). In contrast to the impact of elapsed delay on net firing rate, there was almost no effect on the strength of the directional signal (Fig. 5D2).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS BY EPOCH. The results, presented in Fig. 5, C2 and E2, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
During each epoch (IV–VII), the proportion of neurons exhibiting a main effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During epochs IV and VI, the preponderance of neurons that fired more strongly after a long delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
During epochs IV, VI, and VII, the proportion of neurons exhibiting an interaction effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger direction selectivity and those exhibiting weaker direction selectivity after a long delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS ACROSS A LONG PREMOVEMENT EPOCH. The results, presented in Table 3 and Fig. 17, can be summarized in the following terms.
|
|
2 test, P < 0.05). The preponderance of neurons firing more strongly after a long delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
Interaction effects were significantly more common than expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). The preponderance of neurons in which the directional signal was stronger after a long delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05). These results did not differ significantly between monkeys.
SUMMARY. Among PFC neurons, the length of the elapsed delay exerted a substantial influence on firing rate. A majority of delay-sensitive neurons fired more strongly after a long delay.
Frontal eye field (FEF): anticipated delay
POPULATION. We collected data from 124 neurons in the FEF of three monkeys (Table 1). Curves representing the activity of this population as a function of time during the trial indicate that the level of anticipated delay exerted only minor effects on neuronal activity early in the trial (Fig. 6A1).
|
Main effect of delay.
During each epoch (I–III), the proportion of neurons exhibiting a main effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons firing more strongly and those firing more weakly before a short delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
During no epoch was the proportion of neurons exhibiting an interaction effect significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P > 0.05). During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger direction selectivity and those exhibiting weaker direction selectivity before a short delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS ACROSS A LONG ANTICIPATORY EPOCH. The results, presented in Table 1 and Fig. 11, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
There was a significant main effect of expected delay in 19% of FEF neurons. This percentage was significantly in excess of that expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). The difference in frequency between neurons firing more strongly and those firing more weakly before a short delay was not significant (2 test, P > 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
Interaction effects were no more common than expected by chance (2 test, P > 0.05). The difference in frequency between cases in which direction selectivity was stronger before a short delay and those in which it was weaker was not significant (2 test, P > 0.05). These results did not differ significantly between monkeys.
SUMMARY. Among FEF neurons, the length of the anticipated delay exerted a moderate influence on firing rate. Some neurons fired more strongly and some more weakly in anticipation of a short delay.
Frontal eye field (FEF): elapsed delay
POPULATION. Population activity was enhanced after a long delay as compared to a short delay (Fig. 6A2). The time course of the enhancement is summarized in Fig. 6B2. There was no consistent effect of elapsed delay on the strength of the directional signal (Fig. 6D2).
Individual neurons by epoch. The results, presented in Fig. 6, C2 and E2, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
During each epoch (IV–VII), the proportion of neurons exhibiting a main effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During epochs IV and VI, the preponderance of neurons that fired more strongly after a long delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
During epochs IV–VI, the proportion of neurons exhibiting an interaction effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger direction selectivity and those exhibiting weaker direction selectivity after a long delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS ACROSS A LONG PREMOVEMENT EPOCH. The results, presented in Table 3 and Fig. 17, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
There was a significant main effect of expected delay in 43% of FEF neurons. This percentage was significantly in excess of that expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). The preponderance of neurons firing more strongly after a long delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
Interaction effects were significantly more common than expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). The difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger and weaker direction selectivity after a long delay was not significant (2 test, P > 0.05). These results did not differ significantly between monkeys.
SUMMARY. Among FEF neurons, the length of the elapsed delay exerted a substantial influence on firing rate. A majority of delay-sensitive neurons fired more strongly after a long delay.
FEF/PM: anticipated delay
POPULATION. We collected data from 34 neurons in FEF/PM of two monkeys (Table 1). Curves representing the activity of this population as a function of time during the trial indicate that the length of anticipated delay exerted a strong effect on neuronal activity (Fig. 7A1). The net firing rate was elevated shortly after the presentation of cues predicting short delays and the elevation persisted throughout the delay period (Fig. 7B1).
|
Main effect of delay.
During each epoch (I–III), the proportion of neurons exhibiting a main effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During each epoch, the preponderance of neurons firing more strongly before a short delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
During no epoch was the proportion of neurons exhibiting an interaction effect significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P > 0.05). During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger direction selectivity and those exhibiting weaker direction selectivity before a short delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS ACROSS A LONG ANTICIPATORY EPOCH. The results, presented in Table 1 and Fig. 11, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
There was a significant main effect of expected delay in 24% of FEF/PM neurons. This percentage was significantly in excess of that expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). The preponderance of neurons firing more strongly before a short delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
Interaction effects were no more common than expected by chance (2 test, P > 0.05). The difference in frequency between cases in which direction selectivity was stronger before a short delay and those in which it was weaker was not significant (2 test, P > 0.05). These results did not differ significantly between monkeys.
SUMMARY. Among FEF/PM neurons, the length of the anticipated delay exerted a substantial influence on firing rate. Most delay-sensitive neurons fired more strongly in anticipation of a short delay.
FEF/PM: elapsed delay
POPULATION. Population activity was markedly enhanced toward the end of a short delay versus toward the end of a long delay (Fig. 7A2). The sign of the effect reversed after saccade completion, as indicated by the transition from an upward-directed blue region to a downward-directed red region in Fig. 7B2. There was an apparent slight tendency for the directional signal to be stronger after a short delay (Fig. 7D2).
Individual neurons by epoch. The results, presented in Fig. 7, C2 and E2, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
During epochs IV–VI, the proportion of neurons exhibiting a main effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05) and the preponderance of neurons that fired more strongly after a short delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05). During epoch VII, neurons that fired more strongly after a long delay were significantly preponderant.
Interaction between delay and direction.
During epoch IV, the proportion of neurons exhibiting an interaction effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger direction selectivity and those exhibiting weaker direction selectivity after a long delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS ACROSS A LONG PREMOVEMENT EPOCH. The results, presented in Table 3 and Fig. 17, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
There was a significant main effect of elapsed delay in 38% of FEF/PM neurons. This percentage was significantly in excess of that expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). The preponderance of neurons firing more strongly after a short delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
Interaction effects were no more common than expected by chance (2 test, P > 0.05). There was no difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger and weaker direction selectivity after a long delay. These results did not differ significantly between monkeys.
SUMMARY. Among FEF/PM neurons, the length of the elapsed delay exerted a substantial influence on firing rate. Before and during the saccade, a majority of delay-sensitive neurons fired more strongly after a short delay. During a period beginning after the saccade and extending through reward delivery, this pattern was reversed.
Premotor cortex (PM): anticipated delay
POPULATION. We collected data from 76 neurons in PM of two monkeys (Table 1). Curves representing the activity of this population as a function of time during the trial indicate that the length of the anticipated delay exerted a strong effect on neuronal activity (Fig. 8A1). The net firing rate was sharply elevated throughout the period after presentation of the short-delay cue (Fig. 8B1). The strength of the directional signal was also moderately elevated (Fig. 8D1).
|
Main effect of delay.
During each epoch (I–III), the proportion of neurons exhibiting a main effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During each epoch, the preponderance of neurons firing more strongly before a short delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
During no epoch was the proportion of neurons exhibiting an interaction effect significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P > 0.05). During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger direction selectivity and those exhibiting weaker direction selectivity before a short delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS ACROSS A LONG ANTICIPATORY EPOCH. The results, presented in Table 1 and Fig. 11, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
There was a significant main effect of expected delay in 28% of PM neurons. This percentage was significantly in excess of that expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). The preponderance of neurons firing more strongly before a short delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
Interaction effects were no more common than expected by chance (2 test, P > 0.05). The difference in frequency between cases in which direction selectivity was stronger before a short delay and those in which it was weaker was not significant (2 test, P > 0.05). These results did not differ significantly between monkeys.
SUMMARY. Among PM neurons, the length of the anticipated delay exerted a dramatic influence on firing rate. Most delay-sensitive neurons fired more strongly in anticipation of a short delay.
Premotor cortex (PM): elapsed delay
POPULATION. Population activity was considerably enhanced toward the end of a short delay versus toward the end of a long delay (Fig. 8A2). There was an apparent slight tendency for the directional signal to be stronger after a short delay (Fig. 8D2).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS BY EPOCH. The results, presented in Fig. 8, C2 and E2, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
During each epoch (IV–VII), the proportion of neurons exhibiting a main effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During epochs IV and V, the preponderance of neurons that fired more strongly after a short delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
During epoch V, the proportion of neurons exhibiting an interaction effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger direction selectivity and those exhibiting weaker direction selectivity after a long delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS ACROSS A LONG PREMOVEMENT EPOCH. The results, presented in Table 3 and Fig. 17, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
There was a significant main effect of elapsed delay in 42% of PM neurons. This percentage was significantly in excess of that expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). The preponderance of neurons firing more strongly after a short delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
Interaction effects were no more common than expected by chance (2 test, P > 0.05). There was no difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger and weaker direction selectivity after a long delay. These results did not differ significantly between monkeys.
SUMMARY. Among PM neurons, the length of the elapsed delay exerted a marked influence on firing rate. During the period leading up to the saccade, a majority of delay-sensitive neurons fired more strongly after a short delay.
Supplementary eye field (SEF): anticipated delay
POPULATION. We collected data from 147 neurons in the SEF of two monkeys (Table 1). Curves representing the activity of this population as a function of time during the trial indicate that the length of anticipated delay had only a minor impact on neuronal activity (Fig. 9, A1 and B1).
Individual neurons by epoch. The results, presented in Fig. 9, C1 and E1, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
During epoch II, the proportion of neurons exhibiting a main effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons firing more strongly and those firing more weakly before a short delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
During no epoch was the proportion of neurons exhibiting an interaction effect significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P > 0.05). During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger direction selectivity and those exhibiting weaker direction selectivity before a short delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS ACROSS A LONG ANTICIPATORY EPOCH. The results, presented in Table 1 and Fig. 11, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
There was a significant main effect of expected delay in 12% of SEF neurons. This percentage was significantly in excess of that expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). The difference in frequency between neurons firing more strongly and those firing more weakly before a short delay was not significant (2 test, P > 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
Interaction effects were no more common than expected by chance (2 test, P > 0.05). The difference in frequency between cases in which direction selectivity was stronger before a short delay and those in which it was weaker was not significant (2 test, P > 0.05). These results did not differ significantly between monkeys.
SUMMARY. Among SEF neurons, the length of the anticipated delay exerted a very weak influence on firing rate. A few neurons fired more strongly and a few more weakly in anticipation of a short delay.
Supplementary eye field (SEF): elapsed delay
POPULATION. Population activity was enhanced after a long delay as compared to a short delay (Fig. 9A2). The enhancement was present during the late phase of the delay period and carried over into the saccadic period (Fig. 9B2). There was little or no apparent effect on the strength of the directional signal (Fig. 9D2).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS BY EPOCH. The results, presented in Fig. 9, C2 and E2, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
During each epoch (IV–VII), the proportion of neurons exhibiting a main effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During epochs IV–VI, the preponderance of neurons that fired more strongly after a long delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
During epoch IV, the proportion of neurons exhibiting an interaction effect was significantly in excess of the frequency expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). During no epoch was there a significant difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger direction selectivity and those exhibiting weaker direction selectivity after a long delay (2 test, P > 0.05).
INDIVIDUAL NEURONS ACROSS A LONG PREMOVEMENT EPOCH. The results, presented in Table 3 and Fig. 17, can be summarized in the following terms.
Main effect of delay.
There was a significant main effect of expected delay in 20% of SEF neurons. This percentage was significantly in excess of that expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). The preponderance of neurons firing more strongly after a long delay was significant (2 test, P < 0.05).
Interaction between delay and direction.
Interaction effects were significantly more common than expected by chance (2 test, P < 0.05). The difference in number between neurons exhibiting stronger and weaker direction selectivity after a long delay was not significant (2 test, P > 0.05). These results did not differ significantly between monkeys.
SUMMARY. Among SEF neurons, the length of the elapsed delay exerted a dramatic influence on firing rate. A majority of delay-sensitive neurons fired more strongly after a long delay.
Rostral supplementary motor area (SMAr): anticipated delay
POPULATION. We collected data from 84 neurons in the SMAr of one monkey (Table 1). Curves representing the activity of this population as a function of time during the trial indicate that the length of the anticipated delay exerted a substantial effect on neuronal activity (Fig. 10A1). There was a considerable increase of firing rate beginning shortly after the delay cue on short-delay trials (Fig. 10B1).
