Cited by 26Tactile and Sensory InteractionsNeural dynamics and brain functionMultisensory perception and integration

Short time-scale sensory coding in S1 during discrimination of whisker vibrotactile sequences

Open access
McGuire, Leah M., Telian, Gregory, Laboy-Juárez, Keven J., Miyashita, Toshio, Lee, Daniel J., Smith, Katherine A., Feldman, Daniel E.·2016·PLOS Biology

Abstract

Rodent whisker input consists of dense microvibration sequences that are often temporally integrated for perceptual discrimination. Whether primary somatosensory cortex (S1) participates in temporal integration is unknown. We trained rats to discriminate whisker impulse sequences that varied in single-impulse kinematics (5-20-ms time scale) and mean speed (150-ms time scale). Rats appeared to use the integrated feature, mean speed, to guide discrimination in this task, consistent with similar prior studies. Despite this, 52% of S1 units, including 73% of units in L4 and L2/3, encoded sequences at fast time scales (≤20 ms, mostly 5-10 ms), accurately reflecting single impulse kinematics. 17% of units, mostly in L5, showed weaker impulse responses and a slow firing rate increase during sequences. However, these units did not effectively integrate whisker impulses, but instead combined weak impulse responses with a distinct, slow signal correlated to behavioral choice. A neural decoder could identify sequences from fast unit spike trains and behavioral choice from slow units. Thus, S1 encoded fast time scale whisker input without substantial temporal integration across whisker impulses.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002549

Cites

57 of 57 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?

  • wS1 may integrate sensory information over time and contribute to goal-directed behavior.

    “It has been observed, however, that wS1 may integrate sensory information over time (19) and contribute to goal-directed behavior (20, 21).”

    From Neural correlates of perceptual decision-making in the primary somatosensory cortex (2026) · cites this paper as [19]

    Citation (19) is attached to the temporal-integration claim, not the separate goal-directed-behavior claim. In the Discussion (‘Where in the Brain Does Temporal Integration Occur?’), the paper says it cannot rule out S1 learning to integrate under conditions that favor slow cues, but reports no evidence of such integration in the task studied and suggests it likely occurs downstream of S1. Thus it supports a limited possibility, not the implication that S1 integration was observed. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The primary sensory cortex not only retains relatively weak and sparse choice-related activity but also, in this naturalistic behavioral task, directly participates in categorical coding of an all-or-none decision variable into which the majority of neural populations are recruited.

    “These observations indicate that the primary sensory cortex not only retains relatively weak and sparse choice-related activity, as it was shown previously (10, 11, 19–25), but also, in our naturalistic behavioral task, directly participates in a categorical coding of all-or-none DV into which the majority of neural populations are recruited.”

    From Neural correlates of perceptual decision-making in the primary somatosensory cortex (2026) · cites this paper as [19]

    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
  • Our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that early sensory response (peak 2) is mostly perception-related, involving thalamo-cortico-thalamic loops, while late mostly decision-related response (peak 4) reflects reverberation of neural activity in cortico-cortical S1 to S2 loops.

    “Our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that “early”(20, 21) sensory response (peak 2 in our case) is mostly perception-related, involving thalamo-cortico-thalamic loops (58), while “late” mostly decision-related response (19) (peak 4 in our experiments) reflect reverberation of neural activity (26, 30) in cortico-cortical S1 to S2 loops (10, 11, 22–24).”

    From Neural correlates of perceptual decision-making in the primary somatosensory cortex (2026) · cites this paper as [19]

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

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McGuire, L. M., Telian, G., Laboy-Juárez, K. J., Miyashita, T., Lee, D. J., Smith, K. A., & Feldman, D. E.
Affiliations
University of California, Berkeley (US)
Corresponding author
Feldman, Daniel E.
Venue
PLOS Biology
Published
2016-08-30
Volume
14
Issue
8
Pages
e1002549
ISSN
  • 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-7885
OpenAlex
W2512650568
Cited by
26
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1
FWCI
3.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01 NS072416)
  • National Science Foundation (SMA 1041755, Graduate Research Fellowship)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
Keywords
primary somatosensory cortex, temporal integration, micro-vibration, spike train decoding, sensory coding, rats
MeSH terms
Animals, Discrimination, Psychological, Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory, Female, Neurons, Physical Stimulation, Reaction Time, Somatosensory Cortex, Vibration, Vibrissae, Rats, Long-Evans, Touch Perception

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