Fig. 5: Dynamic hippocampal-cortical synchronization during two reactivations.
From: Electrophysiological signatures underlying variability in human memory consolidation
A Coherence (mean values ± SEM) between cortex and hippocampus is significantly (yellow lines marked) enhanced for strengthening over decaying items (16–30 Hz) and control condition (20–45 Hz) during the first reactivation (p < 0.001; cluster-based permutation test based on two-sided LME, N = 1093 contacts). B Hippocampal ripples coupled with cortical HFB (mean values ± SEM) in the strengthening condition are significantly stronger than that in both the decaying and control conditions during the first reactivation (two-sided LME strengthening vs. decaying: t(1092) = 9.064, p < 0.001; two-sided LME strengthening vs. control: t(1092) = 5.943, p < 0.001; two-sided LME decaying vs. control t(1092) = −4.909, p < 0.001; N = 1093 contacts). C Significant positive correlation between hippocampal-cortical coherence (16–30 Hz) and hippocampal-ripples coupled cortical HFB (t(10) = 3.02, p = 0.013, two-sided paired-sample t-test, N = 11). Data are presented as mean values ± SEM. D An example subject shows a positive correlation between hippocampal-cortical coherence and hippocampal-ripples coupled cortical HFB. E hippocampal-cortical coherence (mean values ± SEM) is significantly (yellow lines marked) enhanced for decaying than strengthening items (10–21 Hz) and control condition (10–21 Hz) during the second reactivation (p < 0.001; cluster-based permutation test based on two-sided LME, N = 1093 contacts). F Hippocampal ripples coupled with cortical HFB (mean values ± SEM) in the strengthening and decaying condition are significantly weaker than that in the control conditions during the second reactivation (two-sided LME control vs. strengthening, t(1092) = 5.394, p < 0.001; two-sided LME control vs. decaying, t(1092) = 7.771, p < 0.001; N = 1093 contacts). HC hippocampus. *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001.
