Back

A frontal motor circuit for economic decisions and actions

Gauld, O. M.; Bao, C.; Li, J.; Boeshertz, G.; Sit, T. P. H.; Warren, J.; Tutt, J. O.; Pan, Y.; Zervogiannis, N.; Clopath, C.; Erlich, J. C.; Duan, C. A.

2025-12-13 neuroscience
10.64898/2025.12.11.693624 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Flexible behaviour requires transforming abstract cognitive representations, such as value preferences, into concrete motor actions. During economic decision-making, individuals evaluate options to guide choices and then transform these choices into specific actions to obtain rewards. Understanding how neural circuits convert these abstract economic decisions into spatial actions remains challenging because decision formation and motor planning are typically intertwined. Here we introduce a mouse task that temporally dissociates value-guided decisions from spatial action planning, and show that a frontal motor network implements the transformation across decision stages through dynamic circuit reconfiguration. Using cortex-wide imaging and optogenetic perturbations, we identified a frontal motor circuit that was causally required for both abstract and motor stages of choice. During the abstract decision stage, neurons in this circuit encoded option values and economic choices independently of sensorimotor contingencies, and unilateral silencing impaired decisions without spatial bias. In contrast, during spatial planning, value and spatial signals were non-linearly integrated to guide action selection, and unilateral silencing produced an ipsilateral bias. A dynamical model captured this transformation, predicting a mode switch from cooperative interhemispheric maintenance of economic choice to competitive, lateralized control of actions, which we validated with simultaneous bilateral recordings. These findings demonstrate how frontal motor circuits reconfigure their interactions to bridge abstract cognition and concrete actions, providing a circuit-level mechanism for flexible, value-guided behaviour.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.