Fig. 2: Influence of vLGN on the performance of learned approaching behavior. | Nature Communications

Fig. 2: Influence of vLGN on the performance of learned approaching behavior.

From: Enhancement and contextual modulation of visuospatial processing by thalamocollicular projections from ventral lateral geniculate nucleus

Fig. 2

a Schematic of a learned visually guided approaching task. The water-restricted animal was trained to approach the presented moving dot to receive water reward. b Superimposed movement tracks of all trials during the 8-day training for an example animal. The side of dot presentation was randomly chosen for each trial but was aligned in this plot for better illustration. c Dot locations (upper) and behavioral choices (lower) for an example task session. Red, correct; blue, incorrect. d Average success rate over training days (n = 11 mice). Compared to the first day, d5, *p = 0.0183; d6, ****p = 0.84 × 10−4; d7, ***p = 0.0007; d8, ****p = 0.11 × 10−4, Kruskal–Wallis test and Dunn’s multiple-comparisons test. e Schematic of viral injection for optogenetic silencing of vLGN VGAT+ axon terminals in SC. f Overall success rate (all sessions with >1° dot size were included) without (gray) and with (orange) photo-inhibition. LEDOff vs. LEDOn, 81% ± 3% vs. 74% ± 2%, n = 36 sessions from 6 mice, **p = 0.0099, two-tailed Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test. g Average success rate at different dot sizes without (gray) and with (orange) photo-inhibition. Curves after fitting are shown. Dashed vertical lines indicate dot size for 50% of peak performance. n = 6 mice. h Relative changes in success rate (%) after photo-inhibition at different dot sizes. **p = 0.002, *p = 0.046, two-tailed paired t-test. i Average success rates for different dot size ranges in LED-Off (gray) LED-On (orange) conditions. Bar represents s.e.m. **p = 0.0015; n.s., p > 0.05, two-tailed paired t-test. j–n Similar to (e–i) but for optogenetic activation of vLGN VGAT+ axons in SC. Statistics: (k) LEDOff vs. LEDOn, n = 54 sessions from 9 mice, ****p < 0.0001, two-tailed Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test; (m) *p = 0.021, *p = 0.019, **p = 0.004, two-tailed paired t-test; (n) **p = 0.0011, two-tailed paired t-test. Data are presented as mean ± s.e.m. in (d, f–i and k–n). Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Back to article page