Extended Data Figure 6: Comparison of power and coherence development during learning.

a, b, Power of 20–40-Hz oscillations in dCA1 (a, n = 10 tetrodes) and LEC (b, n = 10 tetrodes) from 5 rats at time points T1–T5, on error trials at T5 (T5e) and at T5 after down-sampling (T5d), shown as values normalized by power at time point T1. Power of 20–40-Hz oscillations did not change significantly during the course of learning (repeated measures ANOVA: F(4, 36) = 0.72, P = 0.58 for dCA1; F(4, 36) = 1.71, P = 0.17 for LEC). Power on error trials (T5e) was not significantly different from correct trials (T5d; two-tailed paired t-test, t(9) = 1.40, P = 0.20 for dCA1; t(9) = 0.06, P = 0.94 for LEC). c, d, Power of theta oscillations in dCA1 (c) and LEC (d). Theta power did not change during learning (repeated measures ANOVA: F(4, 36) = 0.90, P = 0.47 for dCA1; F(4, 36) = 0.63, P = 0.64 for LEC). Theta power on error trials was not different from correct trials (two-tailed paired t-test, t(9) = 0.24, P = 0.82 for dCA1; t(9) = 0.40, P = 0.70 for LEC). e, Power of 20–40-Hz oscillations in dCA1 (left, n = 8 tetrodes) and LEC (right, n = 8 tetrodes) at the end of training with the original odours (A/B; time point T5), and with odours C/D and E/F (mean ± s.e.m.) (4 rats). Power of the 20–40-Hz oscillations did not change significantly with the new odours, neither between T5 and the first day with C/D or E/F (t(7) < 0.5, P > 0.6 for CA1, t(7) < 0.9, P > 0.4 for LEC) nor during the course of learning with C/D and E/F (repeated measures ANOVA: F(6, 42) = 0.34, P = 0.91 for dCA1; F(6, 42) = 0.44, P = 0.85 for LEC). f, Power of theta oscillations in dCA1 (left) and LEC (right) (mean ± s.e.m.). There was no significant change in the power of theta (repeated measures ANOVA: F(6, 42) = 0.13, P = 0.99 for dCA1; F(6, 42) = 0.71, P = 0.64 for LEC). g, Mean of LEC–dCA1 coherence spectra during cue sampling at successive time points during learning (T1–T5) and on error trials (T5e) and down-sampled correct trials (T5d), plotted in the same way as the time-resolved coherence spectra in Fig. 2b (n = 20 recording pairs from 5 rats). Dots above spectra denote frequencies with significant difference (FDR corrected for 62 multiple comparisons at 0–60 Hz, q < 0.05). h, Coherence averaged across the theta-frequency band during cue sampling in novel odour trials. No change was observed for coherence in the theta frequency band (repeated measures ANOVA: F(2, 30) = 0.02, P = 0.98 for cues C/D and F(2, 30) = 0.25, P = 0.78 for cues E/F).