Fig. 4: Ventral subiculum inactivation does not affect the prevalence or positional decoding of schema cells in the OFC during performance on an established problem.
From: Hippocampal output suppresses orbitofrontal cortex schema cell formation
a, Correlation in firing across mazes for all OFC neurons recorded in control and GtACR2 sessions. The plots show the distribution of r scores with the neurons that met the arbitrary cutoff for classification as schema cells (r > 0.8, P < 0.01, correlation coefficients) shown in orange, nonschema cells (r ≥ 0.4 and r ≤ 0.8, correlation coefficients) in dark gray and noncoding cells (r < 0.4, correlation coefficients) in light gray. b, Percentage of schema neurons at different thresholds for categorization. There was no difference between the two groups in the proportion of neurons at any threshold value (χ2 = 0.67; P = 0.41; d.f. = 1; χ2 test). c, Percentage of schema (Sch.), nonschema (Nonsch.) and noncoding (Noncod.) neurons from control and GtACR2 sessions on each day of training (using thresholds in a). There was no difference between the two groups in the proportion of neurons at any day (χ2 < 2.1; P > 0.15; d.f. = 1; χ2 test). d–f, Explained variance, averaged across neurons, for each factor (epoch, reward, position) within maze in the schema (d; n = 877 units for control; n = 910 units for GtACR2), nonschema (e; n = 771 units for control; n = 722 units for GtACR2) and noncoding (f; n = 208 units for control; n = 202 units for GtACR2) populations. There were no effects of inactivation (P > 0.09; two-tailed Student’s t-test). g, Accuracy of decoding position across all epochs by individual schema cells, where → denotes chance decoding of 12.5%. One-way ANOVA showed that accuracy was similar for decoding within and across mazes for neurons in control (F(1,3710) = 0.068; P = 0.79; \({{{\eta }}}_{{\rm{p}}}^{2}\) = 1.8 × 10−5) and GtACR2 sessions (F(1,366) = 0.016; P = 0.90; \({{{\eta }}}_{{\rm{p}}}^{2}\) = 4.4 × 10−6) and there was no significant effect of inactivation (within: F(1,368) = 0.45; P = 0.50; \({{{\eta }}}_{{\rm{p}}}^{2}\) = 1.2 × 10−4; across: F(1,3688) = 0.35; P = 0.55; \({{{\eta }}}_{{\rm{p}}}^{2}\) = 9.5 × 10−5). h, Accuracy of decoding position within each epoch by ensembles of schema cells, where the dotted line denotes chance decoding of 12.5%. A one-way ANOVA showed that accuracy was similar for decoding within and across mazes for neurons in control (F(1,16) = 0.02; P = 0.88; \({{{\eta }}}_{{\rm{p}}}^{2}\) = 1.5 × 10−3) and GtACR2 sessions (F(1, 16) = 0.31; P = 0.58; \({{{\eta }}}_{{\rm{p}}}^{2}\) = 0.02) and there was no significant effect of inactivation (within: F(1,16) = 0.37; P = 0.55; \({{{\eta }}}_{{\rm{p}}}^{2}\) = 0.023; across: F(1, 16) = 0; P = 0.96; \({{{\eta }}}_{{\rm{p}}}^{2}\) = 1.6 × 10−4; Supplementary Figs. 2–5 and 10).
