Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
eNeuro

eNeuro

Advanced Search

 

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Blog
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • TOPICS
    • Cognition and Behavior
    • Development
    • Disorders of the Nervous System
    • History, Teaching and Public Awareness
    • Integrative Systems
    • Neuronal Excitability
    • Novel Tools and Methods
    • Sensory and Motor Systems
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • For the Media
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact Us
    • Feedback
  • SUBMIT
PreviousNext
Research ArticleNew Research, Sensory and Motor Systems

The Largest Response Component in the Motor Cortex Reflects Movement Timing but Not Movement Type

Matthew T. Kaufman, Jeffrey S. Seely, David Sussillo, Stephen I. Ryu, Krishna V. Shenoy and Mark M. Churchland
eNeuro 3 August 2016, 3 (4) ENEURO.0085-16.2016; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0085-16.2016
Matthew T. Kaufman
1Neurosciences Program, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
2Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
5Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, New York 11724
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Matthew T. Kaufman
Jeffrey S. Seely
6Department of Neuroscience
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jeffrey S. Seely
David Sussillo
1Neurosciences Program, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
2Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephen I. Ryu
2Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
8Department of Neurosurgery, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Palo Alto, California 94301
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Krishna V. Shenoy
1Neurosciences Program, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
2Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
3Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
4Department of Neurobiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
9Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Krishna V. Shenoy
Mark M. Churchland
6Department of Neuroscience
7Grossman Center for the Statistics of Mind, David Mahoney Center for Brain and Behavior Research, Kavli Institute for Brain Science, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY 10032
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Movies
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Task and basic neural responses. A, B, Illustration of the maze task. Monkeys executed reaches that avoided any intervening barriers. The task was performed with a cursor presented just above the monkey’s hand. White trace shows the path of the cursor on one trial. Target, Target onset; Go, go cue; Move, movement onset. C, PSTH for an example neuron for four (of 27) conditions. Each trace shows the trial-averaged firing rate for one reach condition (one unique maze) over time. Averaging was performed twice: locked to target onset (left traces) and movement onset (right traces). Only trials with a 500 ms delay were included. Inset, Reach trajectories, colored the same as their corresponding neural traces. This neuron illustrates the transition between stable preparatory activity and rapidly changing movement-related activity. Scale bars: B, C, horizontal, 200 ms; C, vertical, 10 spikes/s.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Responses of four example neurons. Format is as in Figure 1C, but responses are shown for all 27 conditions. A, Unit with complex responses. This neuron showed both an overall increase in firing rate across conditions and a strong oscillatory component that was condition-specific (unit JAD1-98, same as in Fig. 1C). Scale bars same as Figure 1C. Inset in upper left shows reach trajectories, colored the same as their corresponding neural traces. B, Another unit with complex condition-specific responses, recorded from the other monkey (unit NAD-165). C, Unit with responses that were strongly condition-correlated (unit JAD1-70). D, Unit where the initial response was condition-correlated: a decline across all conditions. Later activity is more condition-specific (unit JAD1-114).

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Performance of demixing on the empirical data. A. Bars show the relative variance captured by each dPCA component for dataset JAD1. Each bar’s horizontal extent indicates the total variance captured by that component. The red portion indicates condition-invariant variance, while the blue portion indicates condition-specific variance. Components are grouped according to whether they were overall condition-invariant (top group, >50% condition-invariant variance) or condition-specific (bottom group, >50% condition-specific variance). Traces show the projection onto the first dimension found by dPCA (CIS1) versus time. Each trace corresponds to one condition. Target, target onset; Move, movement onset. Scale bars, 200 ms. B—F. Same as A, for the remaining datasets.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    Same as Figure 3, but for the recurrent neural network models.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    Demixing performance for one empirical dataset and two surrogate control datasets. A, PSTHs of three example units from dataset JAD1. Scale bars: horizontal, 200 ms; vertical, 10 spikes/s. B, PSTHs for a surrogate dataset where we projected onto the condition-specific dimensions, then rectified so that all firing rates remained positive (see Materials and Methods). This surrogate dataset explores the possibility that a CIS might appear merely due to firing rates being constrained to be positive. The three PSTHs correspond to the same units shown in A, after modification. C, PSTHs for a surrogate dataset where we added condition-correlated components. The condition-correlated components had the same temporal profile as the projections onto the condition-invariant dimensions found by dPCA but had a different amplitude for each condition (see Materials and Methods). This surrogate dataset explores whether a condition-correlated structure at the single-neuron level is sufficient to yield condition-invariant components at the population level. The three PSTHs correspond to the same units shown in A, after modification. D–F. Quantification of the CIS as in Figure 3. Panels correspond to examples above. D is reproduced from Figure 3A for comparison.

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    Comparison of the CIS and hand speed. Hand speed (blue) and the first component of the CIS (red) are shown for four reach conditions. For hand speed, light traces show all trials; heavy trace shows mean over trials. CIS1 is the mean over trials. Insets show the maze for that condition and a prototypical reach path. A, A straight reach with a fast speed profile. Maze ID25. B, A straight reach with a slow speed profile. Maze ID7. C, A curved reach with a long speed profile. Maze ID5. D, A curved reach with an unusual speed profile. Maze ID14. The CIS was similar across all four examples, despite differences in the speed profile. Dataset NAD.

  • Figure 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7.

    Comparison of dPCA applied to neural and muscle populations. A, B, Demixing performance (bars) and the projection onto the first dimension found by dPCA (CIS1) for neural datasets JAD1 and NAD. Each trace corresponds to one condition. These panels are reproduced from Figure 3A,B for comparison with the corresponding analysis of EMG. Dots indicate target onset and movement onset. Scale bar, 200 ms. C, D, Similar analysis as in A and B, but for the muscle populations recorded for monkeys J and N. Muscle activity was recorded for the same sets of conditions as for the neural data in A and B. E, To compare the prevalence of a condition-invariant structure in the neural and muscle populations, we focused on nominally “condition-invariant” components with >50% condition-invariant variance. There were many such components for the neural populations (green) and 1–2 such components for each of the muscle populations (purple). For each such component, two measurements were taken: the fraction of the component’s variance that was condition-invariant (vertical axis) and the total variance captured. The latter was expressed in normalized terms: the variance captured by the k th nominally “condition-invariant” component divided by the total variance captured by the k th “condition-specific” component (horizontal axis). Only the neural datasets contained components that were both strongly condition-invariant (high on the vertical axis) and that captured relatively large amounts of variance (to the right on the horizontal axis). Heaviest symbols correspond to the first dimension found by dPCA for each dataset; higher-numbered dimensions are plotted as progressively lighter symbols. Dashed gray line highlights variance ratio of unity. Circles, monkey J datasets; squares, monkey N datasets.

  • Figure 8.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 8.

    Predicting RT using projections of the data for dataset JAD1. A, Each trace plots CIS1 over time on a single zero-delay trial. Fifty trials selected randomly at intervals throughout the day are shown. Black trace plots the median across all trials. B, Same as in A but for trials with a 500 ms delay period (long delay). The criterion value (gray line) was chosen using long-delay trials. The same value was used for zero-delay trials (A). C–G, Correlation of behavioral RT with the time when the neural criterion value was crossed. For each panel, data are shown for both long-delay trials (blue) and zero-delay trials (red). Lines show linear regressions; dashed lines show 95% confidence bounds of the fit. Each panel in C–G gives the correlation for a different linear projection of the population response: CIS1 (C), the projection onto the first PC (D), the mean over all neurons (E), the projection onto the dimension that best reconstructed speed according to a linear regression (F), and the projection onto the axis found by a logistic regression classifier (G). Trials where the neural data did not cross the criterion value were excluded. H, Coefficient influence for the classifier. Coefficients for condition-invariant dimensions shown in red; condition-specific dimensions shown in black.

  • Figure 9.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 9.

    Predicting RT using projections of the data for dataset NAD. Same format as Figure 8. Regarding H, note that for this dataset there were four CIS components.

  • Figure 10.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 10.

    Various projections that capture CIS1 and rotations of the neural state during movement. Data were first projected onto three dimensions: the dimension that yielded CIS1 and two condition-specific dimensions that captured strong rotational structure (see Materials and Methods). Each panel plots a different view of the data projected onto those three dimensions. A, Four different views of the three-dimensional projection for dataset JAD1. “Baseline” activity (before target onset) plotted in gray, preparatory activity plotted in blue, and activity after the go cue plotted in green and red (colors chosen arbitrarily for each condition). B, Same for the neural network model trained to produce EMG recorded from monkey J. C, Same for dataset NAD. D, Same for the neural network model trained to produce EMG recorded from monkey N.

  • Figure 11.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 11.

    Comparison of the temporal profile of the trajectory of the CIS and the temporal profile of the condition-specific rotational patterns. The vertical axis plots “neural speed”: the rate of change of the neural state in the condition-invariant dimensions (red) and in the first jPCA plane (blue), which captures the strongest rotations. The rate of change was computed separately for each condition, then averaged across conditions. For each dataset that average was normalized by its maximum. For statistical power, results for the neural data were averaged across the three datasets for each monkey. Move, Movement onset. Note that because the data have been smoothed and differentiated, the first moment when the state begins to change is shifted leftwards: the CIS appears to begin changing >200 ms before movement onset, when ∼150 ms is a more accurate estimate (Fig. 3). Since both the condition-invariant dimensions and the jPCA dimensions are processed in the same way, however, their relative timing can be compared.

Movies

  • Figures
  • Movie 1.

    Three-dimensional view of Figure 10A (dataset JAD1), rotating to display structure. Axis labeled CIS corresponds to CIS1.

  • Movie 2.

    Three-dimensional view of Figure 10C (dataset NAD), rotating to display structure.

  • Movie 3.

    Three-dimensional view of Figure 10A, bottom (dataset JAD1), with events unfolding over time. Movie starts 300 ms before target onset, and ends 400 ms after movement onset.

  • Movie 4.

    Three-dimensional view of Figure 10C, bottom (dataset NAD), with events unfolding over time. Movie starts 300 ms before target onset, and ends 600 ms after movement onset.

Back to top

In this issue

eneuro: 3 (4)
eNeuro
Vol. 3, Issue 4
July/August 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for sharing this eNeuro article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Largest Response Component in the Motor Cortex Reflects Movement Timing but Not Movement Type
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from eNeuro
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in eNeuro.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
The Largest Response Component in the Motor Cortex Reflects Movement Timing but Not Movement Type
Matthew T. Kaufman, Jeffrey S. Seely, David Sussillo, Stephen I. Ryu, Krishna V. Shenoy, Mark M. Churchland
eNeuro 3 August 2016, 3 (4) ENEURO.0085-16.2016; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0085-16.2016

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
The Largest Response Component in the Motor Cortex Reflects Movement Timing but Not Movement Type
Matthew T. Kaufman, Jeffrey S. Seely, David Sussillo, Stephen I. Ryu, Krishna V. Shenoy, Mark M. Churchland
eNeuro 3 August 2016, 3 (4) ENEURO.0085-16.2016; DOI: 10.1523/ENEURO.0085-16.2016
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Significance Statement
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
    • Synthesis
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • condition-invariant signal
  • dPCA
  • Movement initiation
  • Movement triggering
  • Reaction time
  • State space

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

New Research

  • Allopregnanolone effects on inhibition in hippocampal parvalbumin interneurons
  • LINCs are vulnerable to epileptic insult and fail to provide seizure control via on-demand activation
  • Pregabalin silences oxaliplatin-activated sensory neurons to relieve cold allodynia
Show more New Research

Sensory and Motor Systems

  • Pregabalin silences oxaliplatin-activated sensory neurons to relieve cold allodynia
  • Supramodal representation of the sense of body ownership in the human parieto-premotor and extrastriate cortices
  • Nonspiking Interneurons in the Drosophila Antennal Lobe Exhibit Spatially Restricted Activity
Show more Sensory and Motor Systems

Subjects

  • Sensory and Motor Systems

  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Issue Archive
  • Blog
  • Browse by Topic

Information

  • For Authors
  • For the Media

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(eNeuro logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2023 by the Society for Neuroscience.
eNeuro eISSN: 2373-2822

The ideas and opinions expressed in eNeuro do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the eNeuro Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in eNeuro should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in eNeuro.