Fig. 5: Cue-specific neuronal ensembles during memory delay.
From: Intermittent rate coding and cue-specific ensembles support working memory
a, Cartoon depicting the synaptic model of working memory. In the absence of cue-selective firing rates, information persists in the cue-specific patterns of potentiated connections (pink and green lines) among neurons (grey nodes). b, Examples of pairwise CCGs computed during memory delay following two different cues. c, CCG-derived connectivity maps during memory delay for two different cue locations measured in one session. Lines are drawn between neuronal pairs exhibiting significant CCGs. d, Differences (dashed line) between the two connectivity maps, quantified as Manhattan distance: the sum of cue-specific connections. Comparison of this metric to a null distribution derived from condition-shuffled data (grey-outlined bars) yielded a z-score (in this case, z = 2.85). e, Pairwise comparisons of connectivity maps across all cue locations. Dashed box shows comparison depicted in c. f, Mean normalized Manhattan distance (black crosses), using data from all n = 25 sessions during the entire memory delay (grey, P = 1.2 × 10−5), during On states only (orange, P = 0.129) and during Off states only (blue, P = 2.5 × 10−5). Violin plots show bootstrap across sessions. ***P < 0.001, two-sided sign-rank.
