Extended Data Fig. 5: Latency and reliability of cue-CA3SC activity across trials.
From: Adaptive stimulus selection for consolidation in the hippocampus
a, Left, Heatmap activity showing responses triggered by all cue onsets across ROIs from each cluster (Up and Down). Row indicates individual trial. Right, response profiles of each cluster. b, Latency between cue onset and peak time of cue-CA3SC response in each trial. Each symbol indicates mean response latency of all cue-CA3SCs in each cluster (Up (purple): n=276 odor, n=143 visual, n=203 reward; Down (yellow): n=136 odor, n77 visual, 78 reward. Two-way ANOVA with post-hoc Tukey’s tests. For odor-CA3SCs: Up x Down: P =0.74.; main effect of trial: P=3.6x10−14; interaction: P=1.8x10−5; for visual-CA3SCs, Up x Down: P=0.62; main effect of trial: P=5.7x10−5; interaction: P=2x10−4; for reward-CA3SCs, Up x Down: P=0.74; main effect of trial: P=9.6x10−6; interaction: P=0.0193). c, Reliability of cue response, defined as the number of trials with response divided by the total number of trials (10 trials per modality) represented as boxplots with median and interquartile range. Whiskers denote minimum and maximum values. d, Extracted 1st principal component (PC) of the cue response of individual cue-CA3SCs assigned to Up and Down clusters using the TCA/K-means approach. To validate TCA and K-means classification, PCA was applied to K x T (trial x trial time) arrays of individual cue-CA3SCs. The 1st PC of each CA3SC robustly captured the initially-identified cue response. Note that 1st PC coefficients across individual trials represent the trial-by-trial evolution in the cue response of each CA3SC. e, Using K-means clustering, coefficient trends across trials were assigned to Up or Down clusters. Mean coefficients are plotted across trials of classified cue-CA3SCs. f, Fraction of cue-CA3SCs in inferred clusters. g, Overlap rates between TCA and PCA classifications of trial-by-trial trends.
