ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2021
Timescales of Local and Cross-Area Interactions during Neuroprosthetic Learning.
Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effective cerebellar neuroprosthetic control after stroke.Cell reports · 2025Article
- Cortico-cerebellar coordination facilitates neuroprosthetic control.Science advances · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
How does the brain integrate signals with different timescales to drive purposeful actions? Brain-machine interfaces (BMIs) offer a powerful tool to causally test how distributed neural networks achieve specific neural patterns. During neuroprosthetic learning, actuator movements are causally linked to primary motor cortex (M1) neurons, i.e., "direct" neurons that project to the decoder and whose firing is required to successfully perform the task. However, it is unknown how such direct M1 neurons interact with both "indirect" local (in M1 but not part of the decoder) and across area neural populations (e.g., in premotor cortex/M2), all of which are embedded in complex biological recurrent networks. Here, we trained male rats to perform a M1-BMI task and simultaneously recorded the activity of indirect neurons in both M2 and M1. We found that both M2 and M1 indirect neuron populations could be used to predict the activity of the direct neurons (i.e., "BMI-potent activity"). Interestingly, compared with M1 indirect activity, M2 neural activity was correlated with BMI-potent activity across a longer set of time lags, and the timescale of population activity patterns evolved more slowly. M2 units also predicted the activity of both M1 direct and indirect neural populations, suggesting that M2 population dynamics provide a continuous modulatory influence on M1 activity as a whole, rather than a moment-by-moment influence solely on neurons most relevant to a task. Together, our results indicate that longer timescale M2 activity provides modulatory influence over extended time lags on shorter-timescale control signals in M1.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.