Cited by 492Neural dynamics and brain functionMotor Control and AdaptationMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Robust neuronal dynamics in premotor cortex during motor planning

Open access
Li, Nuo, Daie, Kayvon, Svoboda, Karel, Druckmann, Shaul·2016·Nature

Abstract

Neural activity maintains representations that bridge past and future events, often over many seconds. Network models can produce persistent and ramping activity, but the positive feedback that is critical for these slow dynamics can cause sensitivity to perturbations. Here we use electrophysiology and optogenetic perturbations in the mouse premotor cortex to probe the robustness of persistent neural representations during motor planning. We show that preparatory activity is remarkably robust to large-scale unilateral silencing: detailed neural dynamics that drive specific future movements were quickly and selectively restored by the network. Selectivity did not recover after bilateral silencing of the premotor cortex. Perturbations to one hemisphere are thus corrected by information from the other hemisphere. Corpus callosum bisections demonstrated that premotor cortex hemispheres can maintain preparatory activity independently. Redundancy across selectively coupled modules, as we observed in the premotor cortex, is a hallmark of robust control systems. Network models incorporating these principles show robustness that is consistent with data.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature17643

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Serial transformation of sensory inputs along bottom-up hierarchical pathways has been observed in rodents engaged in whisker-discrimination tasks, with increasingly stronger association with perceptual choice in S2 and premotor areas rather than wS1.

    “Serial transformation of sensory inputs along bottom–up hierarchical pathways has been observed in rodents engaged in whisker-discrimination tasks (8, 9) with an increasingly stronger association with perceptual choice in S2 (10, 11) and premotor areas (12–14) rather than whisker-related wS1 (9).”

    From Neural correlates of perceptual decision-making in the primary somatosensory cortex (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • This global regulation is unlikely to originate directly from frontal cortical premotor areas since frontal cortices have a high degree of symmetry for both ipsilateral and contralateral projections.

    “Therefore, this global regulation is unlikely to originate directly from frontal cortical premotor areas (12–14) since frontal cortices have a high degree of symmetry for both ipsilateral and contralateral projections (59).”

    From Neural correlates of perceptual decision-making in the primary somatosensory cortex (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Extended Data section suggests that overall ramping activity may be driven by a source outside ALM, a mouse premotor area. That lends limited support to an external origin, but the paper does not identify the citing sentence’s “global regulation” or establish that it is unlikely to originate from frontal premotor areas generally. The projection-symmetry rationale is attached to a different citation (59), not this source. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Peak 4 is likely to reflect participation of the primary somatosensory cortex in motor preparatory activity, often observed in higher motor cortices.

    “Hence, peak 4 is likely to reflect participation of the primary somatosensory cortex in motor preparatory activity, often observed in higher motor cortices (12–14).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [27]Csete ME Doyle JC Reverse engineering of biological complexity. Science 2002 295 1664 1669 11872830

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, N., Daie, K., Svoboda, K., & Druckmann, S.
Affiliations
Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
Corresponding author
  • Svoboda, Karel
  • Druckmann, Shaul
Venue
Nature
Published
2016-04-13
Volume
532
Issue
7600
Pages
459-464
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2336155947
Cited by
492
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 13
FWCI
27.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2016-06-29)
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Howard Hughes Medical Institute
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
premotor cortex, motor planning, preparatory activity, network robustness, interhemispheric connectivity, network redundancy, working memory, optogenetic perturbation, mouse cortex, network models
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain Mapping, Corpus Callosum, Female, Light, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Models, Neurological, Motor Cortex, Movement, Neurons, Mice, Executive Function, Optogenetics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review