How a mouse licks a spout: Cortex-dependent corrections as the mouse tongue reaches for, and misses, targets
Bollu, T.; Ito, B. S.; Whitehead, S. C.; Kardon, B.; Redd, J.; Liu, M. H.; Goldberg, J. H.
Show abstract
AbstractPrecise tongue control is necessary for drinking, eating, and vocalizing1, 2. Yet because tongue movements are fast and difficult to resolve, neural control of lingual kinematics remains poorly understood. Here we combine kilohertz frame-rate imaging and a deep learning based neural network to resolve 3D tongue kinematics in mice drinking from a water spout. Successful licks required previously unobserved corrective submovements (CSMs) which, like online corrections during primate reaches3-10, occurred after the tongue missed unseen, distant, or displaced targets. Photoinhibition of anterolateral motor cortex (ALM) impaired online corrections, resulting in hypometric licks that missed the spout. ALM neural activity reflected upcoming, ongoing, and past CSMs, as well as errors in predicted spout contact. Though less than a tenth of a second in duration, a single mouse lick exhibits hallmarks of online motor control associated with a primate reach, including cortex-dependent corrections after misses.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Opponent control of behavior by dorsomedial striatal pathways depends on task demands and internal state 98%
- Latent neural population dynamics underlying normal breathing, opioid induced respiratory depression, and gasping 98%
- Cognitive boundary signals in the human medial temporal lobe shape episodic memory representation 98%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Layer 6 ensembles can selectively regulate the behavioral impact and layer-specific representation of sensory deviants 98%
- Neural circuit mechanisms for steering control in walking Drosophila 98%
- Slowly evolving dopaminergic activity modulates the moment-to-moment probability of movement initiation. 98%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.