Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28031396›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2017

Operant conditioning of neural activity in freely behaving monkeys with intracranial reinforcement.

Ryan W Eaton, Tyler Libey, Eberhard E Fetz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Mechanisms of brain self-regulation: psychological factors, mechanistic models and neural substrates.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Review
  4. Neural Plasticity in Sensorimotor Brain-Machine Interfaces.Annual review of biomedical engineering · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Movement-dependent electrical stimulation for volitional strengthening of cortical connections in behaving monkeys.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ryan W EatonDepartment of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Tyler LibeyDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; and.
Eberhard E FetzDepartment of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; fetz@uw.edu.

Funding

Washington National Primate Research CenterP51OD010425 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Mari Ostendorf · 2012 to 2026
$201.8M
NEURAL CONTROL OF MUSCLE ACTIVITYR01NS012542 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI FETZ, EBERHARD E, PERLMUTTER, STEVE I · 1985 to 2022
$8.7M
NEURAL CONTROL OF MUSCLE ACTIVITYR37NS012542 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI FETZ, EBERHARD E · 2006 to 2012
$4.5M
NIH HHS P51 OD010425NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS012542NINDS NIH HHS R37 NS012542
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Operant conditioning of neural activity has typically been performed under controlled behavioral conditions using food reinforcement. This has limited the duration and behavioral context for neural conditioning. To reward cell activity in unconstrained primates, we sought sites in nucleus accumbens (NAc) whose stimulation reinforced operant responding. In three monkeys, NAc stimulation sustained performance of a manual target-tracking task, with response rates that increased monotonically with increasing NAc stimulation. We recorded activity of single motor cortex neurons and documented their modulation with wrist force. We conditioned increased firing rates with the monkey seated in the training booth and during free behavior in the cage using an autonomous head-fixed recording and stimulating system. Spikes occurring above baseline rates triggered single or multiple electrical pulses to the reinforcement site. Such rate-contingent, unit-triggered stimulation was made available for periods of 1-3 min separated by 3-10 min time-out periods. Feedback was presented as event-triggered clicks both in-cage and in-booth, and visual cues were provided in many in-booth sessions. In-booth conditioning produced increases in single neuron firing probability with intracranial reinforcement in 48 of 58 cells. Reinforced cell activity could rise more than five times that of non-reinforced activity. In-cage conditioning produced significant increases in 21 of 33 sessions. In-cage rate changes peaked later and lasted longer than in-booth changes, but were often comparatively smaller, between 13 and 18% above non-reinforced activity. Thus intracranial stimulation reinforced volitional increases in cortical firing rates during both free behavior and a controlled environment, although changes in the latter were more robust.

Indexed as

Reinforcement, PsychologyAction PotentialsAnimalsConditioning, OperantElectric StimulationElectromyographyMacaca nemestrinaMaleMotor CortexNeuronsNucleus AccumbensRewardUpper Extremityfree behaviorintracranial reinforcementneural activityoperant conditioningprimate

Identifiers

PMID28031396
PMCPMC5340878

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.