4.8 Article

Rats Generate Vibrissal Sensory Evidence until Boundary Crossing Triggers a Decision

Journal

CURRENT BIOLOGY
Volume 29, Issue 9, Pages 1415-+

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2019.03.016

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. European Research Council advanced grant CONCEPT [294498]
  2. Human Frontier Science Program [RGP0015/2013]
  3. European Union FET grant BIOTACT [215910]
  4. CORONET [269459]
  5. Italian MIUR grant HANDBOT [GA 280778]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Behaviors in which primates collect externally generated streams of sensory evidence, such as judgment of random dot motion direction, are explained by a bounded integration decision model. Does this model extend to rodents, and does it account for behavior in which the motor system generates evidence through interactions with the environment? In this study, rats palpated surfaces to identify the texture before them, showing marked trial-to-trial variability in the number of touches prior to expressing their choice. By high-speed video, we tracked whisker kinematic features and characterized how they encoded the contacted texture. Next, we quantified the evidence for each candidate texture transmitted on each touch by the specified whisker kinematic features. The instant of choice was well fit by modeling the brain as an integrator that gives the greatest weight to vibrissal evidence on first touch and exponentially less weight to evidence on successive touches; according to this model, the rat makes a decision when the accumulated quantity of evidence for one texture reaches a boundary. In summary, evidence appears to be accumulated within the brain until sufficient to support a well-grounded choice. These findings extend the framework of bounded sensory integration from primates to rodents and from passively received evidence to evidence that is actively generated by the sensorimotor system.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available