Extended Data Fig. 8: Enhanced responsiveness of co-responsive cells following preconditioning and stabilization of their responding into the aversive learning phase.
From: Prefrontal encoding of an internal model for emotional inference
(a, b) Left: Population averaged peri-event time histograms showing auditory evoked calcium activity (lines) and SEM (shaded) of activated auditory-only (red) and co-responsive (Co, purple) neurons during preconditioning (PC) for the paired (a) and unpaired (b) groups. Right: Box plots showing median (center), 25%/75% interquartile range (bounds of box) and extreme data points (whiskers) for calcium responses during auditory CSs for the cell classes in the adjacent peri-event time histograms; Mann-Whitney U test (one-sided); *: z = 2.18, r = 2005, p = 0.015; n.s.: z = 1.17, r = 939, p = 0.12. Two-way ANOVA, interaction (cell-types vs groups), F(1, 180) = 0.68, p = 0.41. (c, d) Similar to a-b but for visual responses of the paired (c) and unpaired (d) groups. Mann-Whitney U test (one-sided); *: z = 1.85, r = 2410, p = 0.032; n.s.: z = 1.52, r = 1091, p = 0.064. Two-way ANOVA, interaction (cell-types vs groups), F(1, 213) = 0.28, p = 0.59. (e, f) Spearman correlations between averaged auditory evoked calcium responses in single cells following preconditioning and during recall for the paired (e) and unpaired (f) groups. Each dot represents one neuron. (g, h) Similar to e-f, but for visual responses in the paired (g) and unpaired (h) groups. (i) The distribution of correlation coefficients in the unpaired group between auditory (A) responses during recall and preconditioning by bootstrap resampling. The correlation coefficient in the paired group (red line) falls outside of the 95% confidence interval (dashed lines). (j) Similar to i, but for the correlation coefficients between visual (V) response during recall and preconditioning. (k) Removing cells that were co-responsive during preconditioning (PC) produced a significant shift (beyond 95% confidence interval, CI) in the correlation between visual responsiveness during preconditioning and that during recall compared to a distribution generated by iterative removal of an equivalent number of randomly selected neurons. (l) Representative image of inhibitory opsin expression in dmPFC injection sites for optogenetic inhibition through bilateral optical fiber implants. (m) Schematic showing optical fiber placements (approximated AP position) and eArch3.0-EYFP expression for each rat in the opsin treated group.
