ArticleeLife2025
Non-feature-specific elevated responses and feature-specific backward replay in human brain induced by visual sequence exposure.
Article in eLife, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The ability of cortical circuits to adapt in response to experience is a fundamental property of the brain. After exposure to a moving dot sequence, flashing a dot as a cue at the starting point of the sequence can elicit successive elevated responses even in the absence of the sequence. These cue-triggered elevated responses have been shown to play a crucial role in predicting future events in dynamic environments. However, temporal sequences we are exposed to typically contain rich feature information. It remains unknown whether the elevated responses are feature-specific and, more crucially, how the brain organizes sequence information after exposure. To address these questions, participants were exposed to a predefined sequence of four motion directions for about 30 min, followed by the presentation of the start or end motion direction of the sequence as a cue. Surprisingly, we found that cue-triggered elevated responses were not specific to any motion direction. Interestingly, motion direction information was spontaneously reactivated, and the motion sequence was backward replayed in a time-compressed manner. These effects were observed even after brief exposure. Notably, no replay events were observed when the second or third motion direction of the sequence served as a cue. Further analyses revealed that activity in the medial temporal lobe (MTL) preceded the ripple power increase in visual cortex at the onset of replay, implying a coordinated relationship between the activities in the MTL and visual cortex. Together, these findings demonstrate that visual sequence exposure induces twofold brain plasticity that may simultaneously serve for different functional purposes. The non-feature-specific elevated responses may facilitate general processing of upcoming stimuli, whereas the feature-specific backward replay may underpin passive learning of visual sequences.
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.