Extended Data Fig. 8: Reactivation of hippocampal cells during SWRs following social learning.

a, Firing-rate correlation matrices for an example session (all cell pairs) during pre-sleep, learning trials and post-sleep sessions. The colour bar shows colour-coded r values. Note the increase in post-sleep coactivation in some cell pairs that were coactive during the task (red arrow). b, (EV – REV) measure of post-sleep reactivation of correlated firing during learning trials in control sessions (‘no manipulation’), sessions with optogenetic SWR disruption, and sessions with random optogenetic stimulation. Significant reactivation was observed in CA1 and CA2 control sessions (P = 0.03 and 0.0028, respectively; Wilcoxon’s rank-sum test) or following random stimulation (P = 0.008 and 0.04 for CA1 and CA2, respectively, Wilcoxon’s rank-sum test). There was no significant reactivation in CA1 or CA2 with SWR disruption. CA3 failed to show significant reactivation in any session (P > 0.05). c, d, Significant reactivation (EV – REV) was observed in CA1 (P < 0.05, t-test) and CA2 (P < 0.01) during the entire slow-wave sleep period (c) but not the REM sleep period (P > 0.05, t-test) (d). e, EV and REV for a subsample of approximately the same number of cells for different regions (CA1, n = 73; CA2, n = 69; CA3, n = 67). f, Cells from CA1 and CA2 that contributed the most to the total explained variance (first quartile) had a significantly higher rotated spatial correlation (social-remapping) than the rest of the cells (P = 0.0354 and P = 0.0223 for CA1 and CA2 respectively; P > 0.05 for CA3; Wilcoxon’s rank-signed test). g–i, Average peri-SWR firing-rate responses for social-remapping and social-invariant cells from CA1 (g), CA2 (h) and CA3 (i) region in pre- and post-sleep. Note that social-remapping cells show higher SWR firing rates in post-sleep but not pre-sleep sessions (CA1, n = 151, P = 0.0055; CA2, n = 306, P = 0.016; CA3, n = 79, P > 0.05).