Extended Data Fig. 10: Context-specific preparatory activity retains memory trace of previous learning and reduces interference.
From: A combinatorial neural code for long-term motor memory
a. Schematic of the memory trace. ALM preparatory activity from task contexts 1, 2, and 1’ is projected onto the CDDelay from task context 2. Memory trace is defined as a selectivity increase along the CDDelay for task context 2 during performance of task context 1’, as shown in black arrows combining blue and red arrows. b. Memory trace. Change in delay epoch selectivity along the CDDelay for task context 2 from task context 1 to 1’. Bar/errorbar, mean/s.e.m. **P = 0.005, two-tailed paired t-test. c. Decoding accuracy of the CDDelay for task context 2 tested on task contexts 1 (52.75 ± 5.24%) and 1’ (58.66 ± 4.63%). Cross, mean ± s.e.m. *P = 0.0199, two-tailed paired t-test. 26 fields of view from 5 mice. d. Speed of re-learning task context 1’ as a function of the CDDelay reorganization across task contexts 1 and 2. Number of trials to reach criterion performance in task context 1’ relative to number of trials during the initial learning of task context 1. Mice exhibiting more distinct CDDelay’s across task contexts (i.e. lower dot product) re-learned the previously learned task context 1’ faster (i.e. fewer trials to reach 75% performance criterion). Each dot shows one field of view from one mouse. Dotted line, linear regression; R, Pearson’s correlation.
