Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33347436›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2020

Prediction error signaling explains neuronal mismatch responses in the medial prefrontal cortex.

Lorena Casado-Román, Guillermo V Carbajal, David Pérez-González, Manuel S Malmierca

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Prediction from Statistical Learning Aids Auditory Scene Analysis.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Two Prediction Error Systems in the Nonlemniscal Inferior Colliculus: "Spectral" and "Nonspectral".The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lorena Casado-RománCognitive and Auditory Neuroscience Laboratory (CANELAB), Institute of Neuroscience of Castilla y León (INCYL), Salamanca, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-9583-2402
Guillermo V CarbajalCognitive and Auditory Neuroscience Laboratory (CANELAB), Institute of Neuroscience of Castilla y León (INCYL), Salamanca, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-5266-1941
David Pérez-GonzálezCognitive and Auditory Neuroscience Laboratory (CANELAB), Institute of Neuroscience of Castilla y León (INCYL), Salamanca, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-6288-2692
Manuel S MalmiercaCognitive and Auditory Neuroscience Laboratory (CANELAB), Institute of Neuroscience of Castilla y León (INCYL), Salamanca, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-0168-7572
Instituto de Estudios de Ciencias de la Salud de Castilla y León · ESUniversidad de Salamanca · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mismatch negativity (MMN) is a key biomarker of automatic deviance detection thought to emerge from 2 cortical sources. First, the auditory cortex (AC) encodes spectral regularities and reports frequency-specific deviances. Then, more abstract representations in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) allow to detect contextual changes of potential behavioral relevance. However, the precise location and time asynchronies between neuronal correlates underlying this frontotemporal network remain unclear and elusive. Our study presented auditory oddball paradigms along with "no-repetition" controls to record mismatch responses in neuronal spiking activity and local field potentials at the rat medial PFC. Whereas mismatch responses in the auditory system are mainly induced by stimulus-dependent effects, we found that auditory responsiveness in the PFC was driven by unpredictability, yielding context-dependent, comparatively delayed, more robust and longer-lasting mismatch responses mostly comprised of prediction error signaling activity. This characteristically different composition discarded that mismatch responses in the PFC could be simply inherited or amplified downstream from the auditory system. Conversely, it is more plausible for the PFC to exert top-down influences on the AC, since the PFC exhibited flexible and potent predictive processing, capable of suppressing redundant input more efficiently than the AC. Remarkably, the time course of the mismatch responses we observed in the spiking activity and local field potentials of the AC and the PFC combined coincided with the time course of the large-scale MMN-like signals reported in the rat brain, thereby linking the microscopic, mesoscopic, and macroscopic levels of automatic deviance detection.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAnimalsAuditory CortexAuditory PerceptionElectroencephalographyEvoked Potentials, AuditoryFemaleNeuronsPrefrontal CortexRatsRats, Long-EvansReaction Time

Identifiers

PMID33347436
PMCPMC7785337
OpenAlexW3117622115

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.