Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Fast and slow transitions in frontal ensemble activity during flexible sensorimotor behavior

Abstract

The ability to shift between repetitive and goal-directed actions is a hallmark of cognitive control. Previous studies have reported that adaptive shifts in behavior are accompanied by changes of neural activity in frontal cortex. However, neural and behavioral adaptations can occur at multiple time scales, and their relationship remains poorly defined. Here we developed an adaptive sensorimotor decision-making task for head-fixed mice, requiring them to shift flexibly between multiple auditory–motor mappings. Two-photon calcium imaging of secondary motor cortex (M2) revealed different ensemble activity states for each mapping. When adapting to a conditional mapping, transitions in ensemble activity were abrupt and occurred before the recovery of behavioral performance. By contrast, gradual and delayed transitions accompanied shifts toward repetitive responding. These results demonstrate distinct ensemble signatures associated with the start versus end of sensory-guided behavior and suggest that M2 leads in engaging goal-directed response strategies that require sensorimotor associations.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Behavioral performance of head-fixed mice in an adaptive sensorimotor decision-making task.
Figure 2: Bilateral inactivation of secondary motor cortex impairs adjustment to sound-guided trials.
Figure 3: Two-photon calcium imaging of task-related activity in secondary motor cortex.
Figure 4: Transitions in ensemble activity occur earlier and are more abrupt following switch to sound-guided trials.
Figure 5: Multiple strategies are associated with distinct population activity patterns.
Figure 6: M2 ensembles revisit previous activity patterns upon re-exposure to corresponding trial type.
Figure 7: Comparison between neural activity patterns in M2, ALM, and V1 during flexible sensorimotor behavior.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Griffiths, K.R., Morris, R.W. & Balleine, B.W. Translational studies of goal-directed action as a framework for classifying deficits across psychiatric disorders. Front. Syst. Neurosci. 8, 101 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Asaad, W.F., Rainer, G. & Miller, E.K. Task-specific neural activity in the primate prefrontal cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 84, 451–459 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rich, E.L. & Shapiro, M. Rat prefrontal cortical neurons selectively code strategy switches. J. Neurosci. 29, 7208–7219 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Rodgers, C.C. & DeWeese, M.R. Neural correlates of task switching in prefrontal cortex and primary auditory cortex in a novel stimulus selection task for rodents. Neuron 82, 1157–1170 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mitz, A.R., Godschalk, M. & Wise, S.P. Learning-dependent neuronal activity in the premotor cortex: activity during the acquisition of conditional motor associations. J. Neurosci. 11, 1855–1872 (1991).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Chen, L.L. & Wise, S.P. Neuronal activity in the supplementary eye field during acquisition of conditional oculomotor associations. J. Neurophysiol. 73, 1101–1121 (1995).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pasupathy, A. & Miller, E.K. Different time courses of learning-related activity in the prefrontal cortex and striatum. Nature 433, 873–876 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Antzoulatos, E.G. & Miller, E.K. Differences between neural activity in prefrontal cortex and striatum during learning of novel abstract categories. Neuron 71, 243–249 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Mante, V., Sussillo, D., Shenoy, K.V. & Newsome, W.T. Context-dependent computation by recurrent dynamics in prefrontal cortex. Nature 503, 78–84 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Stokes, M.G. et al. Dynamic coding for cognitive control in prefrontal cortex. Neuron 78, 364–375 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Wilson, R.C., Takahashi, Y.K., Schoenbaum, G. & Niv, Y. Orbitofrontal cortex as a cognitive map of task space. Neuron 81, 267–279 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Durstewitz, D., Vittoz, N.M., Floresco, S.B. & Seamans, J.K. Abrupt transitions between prefrontal neural ensemble states accompany behavioral transitions during rule learning. Neuron 66, 438–448 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Karlsson, M.P., Tervo, D.G.R. & Karpova, A.Y. Network resets in medial prefrontal cortex mark the onset of behavioral uncertainty. Science 338, 135–139 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bunge, S.A. et al. Neural circuitry underlying rule use in humans and nonhuman primates. J. Neurosci. 25, 10347–10350 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. White, I.M. & Wise, S.P. Rule-dependent neuronal activity in the prefrontal cortex. Exp. Brain Res. 126, 315–335 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wise, S.P. & Murray, E.A. Arbitrary associations between antecedents and actions. Trends Neurosci. 23, 271–276 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Petrides, M. Deficits on conditional associative-learning tasks after frontal- and temporal-lobe lesions in man. Neuropsychologia 23, 601–614 (1985).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Halsband, U. & Passingham, R.E. Premotor cortex and the conditions for movement in monkeys (Macaca fascicularis). Behav. Brain Res. 18, 269–277 (1985).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Nixon, P.D., McDonald, K.R., Gough, P.M., Alexander, I.H. & Passingham, R.E. Cortico-basal ganglia pathways are essential for the recall of well-established visuomotor associations. Eur. J. Neurosci. 20, 3165–3178 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Toni, I., Ramnani, N., Josephs, O., Ashburner, J. & Passingham, R.E. Learning arbitrary visuomotor associations: temporal dynamic of brain activity. Neuroimage 14, 1048–1057 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Boettiger, C.A. & D'Esposito, M. Frontal networks for learning and executing arbitrary stimulus-response associations. J. Neurosci. 25, 2723–2732 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Rushworth, M.F.S., Hadland, K.A., Paus, T. & Sipila, P.K. Role of the human medial frontal cortex in task switching: a combined fMRI and TMS study. J. Neurophysiol. 87, 2577–2592 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Murray, E.A., Bussey, T.J. & Wise, S.P. Role of prefrontal cortex in a network for arbitrary visuomotor mapping. Exp. Brain Res. 133, 114–129 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Preuss, T.M. Do rats have prefrontal cortex? The Rose-Woolsey-Akert program reconsidered. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 7, 1–24 (1995).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nachev, P., Kennard, C. & Husain, M. Functional role of the supplementary and pre-supplementary motor areas. Nat Rev. Neurosci. 9, 856–869 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Schall, J.D., Stuphorn, V. & Brown, J.W. Monitoring and control of action by the frontal lobes. Neuron 36, 309–322 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Isoda, M. & Hikosaka, O. Switching from automatic to controlled action by monkey medial frontal cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 10, 240–248 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gremel, C.M. & Costa, R.M. Premotor cortex is critical for goal-directed actions. Front. Comput. Neurosci. 7, 110 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Sul, J.H., Jo, S., Lee, D. & Jung, M.W. Role of rodent secondary motor cortex in value-based action selection. Nat. Neurosci. 14, 1202–1208 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Erlich, J.C., Bialek, M. & Brody, C.D. A cortical substrate for memory-guided orienting in the rat. Neuron 72, 330–343 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Murakami, M., Vicente, M.I., Costa, G.M. & Mainen, Z.F. Neural antecedents of self-initiated actions in secondary motor cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 17, 1574–1582 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Passingham, R.E., Myers, C., Rawlins, N., Lightfoot, V. & Fearn, S. Premotor cortex in the rat. Behav. Neurosci. 102, 101–109 (1988).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Fusi, S., Asaad, W.F., Miller, E.K. & Wang, X.-J. A neural circuit model of flexible sensorimotor mapping: learning and forgetting on multiple timescales. Neuron 54, 319–333 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Chen, T.-W. et al. Ultrasensitive fluorescent proteins for imaging neuronal activity. Nature 499, 295–300 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Machens, C.K., Romo, R. & Brody, C.D. Functional, but not anatomical, separation of “what” and “when” in prefrontal cortex. J. Neurosci. 30, 350–360 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Brendel, W., Romo, R. & Machens, C.K. Demixed principal component analysis. in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 24 (eds. Shawe-Taylor J., Zemel, R.S., Bartlett, P.L., Pereira, F. & Weinberger, K.Q.) http://papers.nips.cc/paper/4215-demixed-principal-component-analysis (2011).

  37. Guo, Z.V. et al. Flow of cortical activity underlying a tactile decision in mice. Neuron 81, 179–194 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Li, N., Chen, T.-W., Guo, Z.V., Gerfen, C.R. & Svoboda, K. A motor cortex circuit for motor planning and movement. Nature 519, 51–56 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Duan, C.A., Erlich, J.C. & Brody, C.D. Requirement of prefrontal and midbrain regions for rapid executive control of behavior in the rat. Neuron 86, 1491–1503 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Asaad, W.F., Rainer, G. & Miller, E.K. Neural activity in the primate prefrontal cortex during associative learning. Neuron 21, 1399–1407 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Darrah, J.M., Stefani, M.R. & Moghaddam, B. Interaction of N-methyl-D-aspartate and group 5 metabotropic glutamate receptors on behavioral flexibility using a novel operant set-shift paradigm. Behav. Pharmacol. 19, 225–234 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Znamenskiy, P. & Zador, A.M. Corticostriatal neurons in auditory cortex drive decisions during auditory discrimination. Nature 497, 482–485 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Brasted, P.J. & Wise, S.P. Comparison of learning-related neuronal activity in the dorsal premotor cortex and striatum. Eur. J. Neurosci. 19, 721–740 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Wallis, J.D., Anderson, K.C. & Miller, E.K. Single neurons in prefrontal cortex encode abstract rules. Nature 411, 953–956 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Wills, T.J., Lever, C., Cacucci, F., Burgess, N. & O'Keefe, J. Attractor dynamics in the hippocampal representation of the local environment. Science 308, 873–876 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Leutgeb, S. et al. Independent codes for spatial and episodic memory in hippocampal neuronal ensembles. Science 309, 619–623 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Hyman, J.M., Ma, L., Balaguer-Ballester, E., Durstewitz, D. & Seamans, J.K. Contextual encoding by ensembles of medial prefrontal cortex neurons. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 5086–5091 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Schneider, D.M., Nelson, A. & Mooney, R. A synaptic and circuit basis for corollary discharge in the auditory cortex. Nature 513, 189–194 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Manita, S. et al. A top-down cortical circuit for accurate sensory perception. Neuron 86, 1304–1316 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Rothwell, P.E. et al. Input- and output-specific regulation of serial order performance by corticostriatal circuits. Neuron 88, 345–356 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Pologruto, T.A., Sabatini, B.L. & Svoboda, K. ScanImage: flexible software for operating laser scanning microscopes. Biomed. Eng. Online 2, 13 (2003).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Peron, S.P., Freeman, J., Iyer, V., Guo, C. & Svoboda, K. A cellular resolution map of barrel cortex activity during tactile behavior. Neuron 86, 783–799 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank D. Lee, M. Picciotto, and J. Taylor for discussions, and C. Posner and R. Hannibal for assistance with behavioral training. This work was supported by National Institute of Aging center grant P50AG047270 (A.C.K.), National Institute of Mental Health grant R21MH110712 (A.C.K.), NARSAD Young Investigator Award (A.C.K.), National Institutes of Health training grant T32NS041228 (M.J.S.), National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship DGE-1122492 (M.J.S.), and a Brown-Coxe Postdoctoral Fellowship (F.A.).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

M.J.S. and A.C.K. conceived the project. M.J.S. performed all experiments. V.P. assisted with mouse surgery and inactivation experiments. F.A. and M.L. assisted with behavioral training and histology. M.J.S. and A.C.K. analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alex C Kwan.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Integrated supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 1 Summary of behavioral performances for mice in imaging experiments.

(a) Task performance for mice during M2 imaging experiments. Open triangles, individual experiments. Filled triangles, mean±s.e.m. n = 9 sessions from 5 mice. (b) Same as (a) for ALM imaging experiments. n = 8 sessions from 4 mice. (c) Same as (a) for V1 imaging experiments. n = 4 sessions from 2 mice.

Supplementary Figure 2 Slower first lick times for trials that were incongruent with the stimulus–response contingencies of the prior block.

(a) The difference in mean first lick times (see Methods for definition) between left and right responses for perseverative hit trials during sound block. Open triangle, individual experiment. Filled triangle, mean±s.e.m. This plot shows that a mouse could respond faster to either left or right lick port. The differences could be due to a combination of factors including placement of the lick ports and the internal bias of the animal. (b) Schematic illustrating perseverative hit, other hit, and perseverative error trials. (c) Based on the analysis in (a), either left or right is denoted as the fast direction. The mean first lick times for the fast direction are plotted for perseverative hit (pHit), other hit (oHit), and perseverative error (pErr) trials occurring during pre-switch (20 trials before block switch) or post-switch (20 trials after block switch) condition. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to assess differences between pHit trials and oHit or pErr trials in the same block type. We also tested sound versus action blocks, and found no significant differences for any comparisons of the same trial types (p>0.05, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). Line, individual experiments. Filled triangles, mean±s.e.m (d) Same as (c) except reporting the average of mean first lick time for the fast and slow directions for each experiment. There were no significant differences for any comparisons of the same trial types between sound and action blocks (p>0.05, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). (e) Same as Fig. 1e, except using only the 20 trials pre-switch. (f) Same as Fig. 1e, except using only the 20 trials post-switch. n = 9 sessions from 5 mice.

Supplementary Figure 3 Video tracking of whisker and hindpaw positions during the adaptive decision-making task.

(a) Still frame from a video taken using an infrared webcam. One whisker on each side of the face was painted using a phosphorescent paint marker (cat. #222-C-GO, Marvy Uchida). Whiskers were illuminated by two infrared light-emitting diodes (IR-LED). A third IR-LED was programmed to turn on 1 s before auditory cues, so the video could be synchronized to the task events. When the room light was turned off, the reflected infrared light could be visualized by the webcam. (b) Mean position of the left and right whiskers for different trial conditions for subject M12. These traces were averaged across pre-switch, correct trials. For this analysis, each whisker was converted to a binary mask based on pixel intensity. The centroid of the mask was located in each frame, and then a line was fitted between the centroid and a fixed point on the face. The angle between the fitted line and the horizontal axis is reported, with positive deflections being protractions and negative deflections being retractions of the whisker. (c) Same as (b) for another subject, M13. (d) Still frame from a video showing a painted hind paw. The webcam was positioned under the animal, to record footage through the acrylic tube. The synchronization IR-LED is visible. (e) Mean x- and y- positions of the right hindpaw for different trial conditions for subject M12. Hindpaw and whisker data were obtained from two different behavioral sessions.

Supplementary Figure 4 Approximating the spread of muscimol during inactivation experiments by injecting low-molecular-weight fluorescein.

Fluorescein (disodium salt, MW=412; #S25328, Fisher Scientific) was injected bilaterally into M2, at the same concentration and volume used for muscimol (5 mM, 46 nL per hemisphere). Animal was euthanized at about the time when behavioral testing would have occurred (1 hr after injections) via transcardial perfusion, and the brain was immediately sectioned with a vibratome. Using a wide-field fluorescence microscope, five images were taken for each brain slice and then stitched together to generate the figures. The image series was fitted to wireframes from the Paxinos and Franklin mouse atlas. These results showed a spread of ~1 mm along the anterior-posterior axis. The fluorescein dye was largely restricted to M2 and Cg1.

Supplementary Figure 5 Bilateral inactivation of M2 has no effect on mean lick rate or first lick response time.

(a) Same analysis as Fig. 1e using data from saline- (black, red, blue) and muscimol-injected (overlaid in green) mice. Lick rates in each rule-sensory-motor combination were compared between saline and muscimol conditions for each 0.1 s bin, and the bars at the top of the panels denote significant differences (p<0.01, t-test; only 4 bins had significant difference by this measure, and none were consecutive bins). Line, mean. Shading, ±s.e.m. (b) Same analysis as Supplementary Fig. 2c, using data from the saline- (black, red) and muscimol-injected (green) mice. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to assess differences between saline and muscimol conditions. n = 11 mice.

Supplementary Figure 6 Relationship between task parameters and neural/behavioral transitions.

(a) Ensemble transition trials plotted against the behavioral transition trial from the same block (see Methods for definition of transition trials). Each point represents one block switch. Bold circle, median value. Left panel: n = 33 switches to a sound block from 9 sessions from 5 mice. Right panel: n = 35 switches to a spatial block from 9 sessions from 5 mice. Symbols denote the different experimental sessions. (b) Same as (a), except symbols denote the subjects tested. (c) Same as (a), except symbol sizes denote the number of other errors in the block. (d) Same as (a), except symbol sizes denote the number of perseverative errors in the block.

Supplementary Figure 7 Strategy-specific differences in decoding accuracy and neural trajectory separation are not due to differences in trial conditions.

(a, c) Same analysis as performed for Fig. 5d except using only the subset of trials with matched trial conditions. (b, d) Same analysis as performed for Fig. 5e except using only the subset of trials with matched trial conditions. (e, f) Same analysis as performed for Fig. 6b except using only the subset of trials with matched trial conditions. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to test for significance, and the p-values are noted in the figure. n = 9 sessions from 5 mice.

Supplementary Figure 8 Choice selectivity for neurons in M2, ALM and V1.

(a) Selectivity for current choice was quantified by calculating the normalized ΔF/F difference during pre-switch, sound-guided trials. Each row represents an M2 neuron. Only M2 neurons that were significant for current choice, C(n), at t = 3 s from response are plotted. Cells are sorted by their choice selectivity. n = 9 sessions from 5 mice. (b) Same as (a) for ALM. n = 8 sessions from 4 mice. (c) Same as (a) for V1. Neurons that were significant for current choice, C(n), at t = 1 s from response are plotted. n = 4 sessions from 2 mice.

Supplementary Figure 9 Summary of behavioral and neural results.

A summary of the task, behavioral performance, and neural dynamics. Recovery of behavioral performance following a switch was approximated as an exponential function for this schematic. The plots were generated based on the median values of behavioral transition trial (sound: 19.0, action: 17.5; dotted lines), neural transition trial (sound: 5.1, action: 14.6), midpoint trial (sound: 4.0, action: 10.4), steepness (sound: 1.02, action: 0.35), and range (sound: 0.36, action: 0.38).

Supplementary information

Supplementary Text and Figures

Supplementary Figures 1–9 and Supplementary Table 1 (PDF 2043 kb)

Supplementary Methods Checklist

xx (PDF 471 kb)

Supplementary Video 1

A mouse performing sound-guided trials from the adaptive decision-making task. Video and audio were captured using an infrared webcam. (MP4 23534 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Siniscalchi, M., Phoumthipphavong, V., Ali, F. et al. Fast and slow transitions in frontal ensemble activity during flexible sensorimotor behavior. Nat Neurosci 19, 1234–1242 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4342

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4342

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing