Fig. 6: Task-inhibited value responses dominate aPC.

a Example of single-unit firing activity in aPC in trained animals. Peri-stimulus time histogram (PSTH) and spike raster plots showed stable task-related responses. b Task-related mean firing rate evolution ± SEM in aPC units. After a first detection peak at CS, aPC displayed monotonic RP during the waiting period as a progressive decrease in firing rate. Right: Box plots showing median aPC firing rates for CS and waiting period (n = 486 units; one-way ANOVA with Tukey post hoc comparisons). The bounds of the boxes represent 25th to 75th percentiles. Lower and upper whiskers represent minimum and maximum values without outliers; outliers indicated by circles. * indicates P < 0.05 (see Supplementary Table 1 for P values and test details). Source data are provided as a Source Data file. c Task-related mean firing rate evolution ± SEM in aPC units in the first training session. Note the more balanced net firing rate during the waiting period. d–f Fraction of single units showing significant task-excited, task-inhibited, or no responses to either one or more trial types (CS0, CS50, CS100) at CS (d), during wait (e), and at US (f). Unit responsiveness was tested against baseline (Friedman test, P < 0.05 with Benjamini–Hochberg correction). The fraction of task-inhibited units increased after training. The fraction of excited units, as well as their level of selectivity to one or more trial types, remained relatively stable. g Classification of aPC units into functional clusters. Unit responsiveness during different trial types was quantified by auROC. (left) Hierarchical clustering was performed on the first five principal components (center, grayscale) of the auROC traces and revealed eight prominent task-response clusters (right). h–j The task-response clusters identified in (g) were grouped according to their responsiveness at CS and during the waiting period. We identified three major groups with (h) task-excited transient activity at CS, (i) task-excited sustained activity during waiting, and (j) task-inhibited responses. Displayed mean firing rate ± SEM. The color of the titles matches the cluster color in the dendrogram in (g). Unlike the task-inhibited cluster, none of the task-excited clusters displayed a monotonic RP (see Supplementary Fig. 7f–h). n indicates the number of units.