Distinct mechanisms mediate speed-accuracy adjustments in cortico-subthalamic networks

  1. Damian M Herz
  2. Huiling Tan
  3. John-Stuart Brittain
  4. Petra Fischer
  5. Binith Cheeran
  6. Alexander L Green
  7. James FitzGerald
  8. Tipu Z Aziz
  9. Keyoumars Ashkan
  10. Simon Little
  11. Thomas Foltynie
  12. Patricia Limousin
  13. Ludvic Zrinzo
  14. Rafal Bogacz
  15. Peter Brown  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Oxford, United Kingdom
  2. Kings College London, United Kingdom
  3. University College London Institute of Neurology, United Kingdom

Abstract

Optimal decision-making requires balancing fast but error-prone and more accurate but slower decisions through adjustments of decision thresholds. Here, we demonstrate two distinct correlates of such speed-accuracy adjustments by recording subthalamic nucleus (STN) activity and electroencephalography in eleven Parkinson’s disease patients during a perceptual decision-making task; STN low-frequency oscillatory (LFO) activity (2-8 Hz), coupled to activity at prefrontal electrode Fz, and STN beta activity (13-30 Hz) coupled to electrodes C3/C4 close to motor cortex. These two correlates not only differed in their cortical topography and spectral characteristics, but also in the relative timing of recruitment and in their precise relationship with decision thresholds. Increases of STN LFO power preceding the response predicted increased thresholds only after accuracy instructions, while cue-induced reductions of STN beta power decreased thresholds irrespective of instructions. These findings indicate that distinct neural mechanisms determine whether a decision will be made in haste or with caution.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated
    1. Damian Herz
    (2017) Neural correlates of speed-accuracy adjustments in the subthalamic nucleus
    Publicly available at Oxford University Research Archive (uuid: 09bef38c-999f-4fb7-aa46-14eda3123571).

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Damian M Herz

    Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Huiling Tan

    Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8038-3029
  3. John-Stuart Brittain

    Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Petra Fischer

    Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5585-8977
  5. Binith Cheeran

    Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Alexander L Green

    Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. James FitzGerald

    Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Tipu Z Aziz

    Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Keyoumars Ashkan

    Department of Neurosurgery, Kings College Hospital, Kings College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Simon Little

    Unit of Functional Neurosurgery, Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, University College London Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Thomas Foltynie

    Unit of Functional Neurosurgery, Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, University College London Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Patricia Limousin

    Unit of Functional Neurosurgery, Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, University College London Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Ludvic Zrinzo

    Unit of Functional Neurosurgery, Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, University College London Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Rafal Bogacz

    Medical Research Council Brain Network Dynamics Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Peter Brown

    Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, John Radcliffe Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    peter.brown@ndcn.ox.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5201-3044

Funding

Medical Research Council (MC_UU_12024/1)

  • Peter Brown

Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (655605)

  • Damian M Herz

Parkinson Appeal UK

  • Thomas Foltynie
  • Patricia Limousin
  • Ludvic Zrinzo

Monument Trust

  • Thomas Foltynie
  • Patricia Limousin
  • Ludvic Zrinzo

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Human subjects: In accordance with the declaration of Helsinki, participants gave written informed consent to participate in the study, which was approved by the local ethics committee (Oxfordshire REC A).

Copyright

© 2017, Herz et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,910
    views
  • 667
    downloads
  • 82
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Damian M Herz
  2. Huiling Tan
  3. John-Stuart Brittain
  4. Petra Fischer
  5. Binith Cheeran
  6. Alexander L Green
  7. James FitzGerald
  8. Tipu Z Aziz
  9. Keyoumars Ashkan
  10. Simon Little
  11. Thomas Foltynie
  12. Patricia Limousin
  13. Ludvic Zrinzo
  14. Rafal Bogacz
  15. Peter Brown
(2017)
Distinct mechanisms mediate speed-accuracy adjustments in cortico-subthalamic networks
eLife 6:e21481.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21481

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21481

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Pál Barzó, Ildikó Szöts ... Gábor Tamás
    Research Article

    The basic excitatory neurons of the cerebral cortex, the pyramidal cells, are the most important signal integrators for the local circuit. They have quite characteristic morphological and electrophysiological properties that are known to be largely constant with age in the young and adult cortex. However, the brain undergoes several dynamic changes throughout life, such as in the phases of early development and cognitive decline in the aging brain. We set out to search for intrinsic cellular changes in supragranular pyramidal cells across a broad age range: from birth to 85 y of age and we found differences in several biophysical properties between defined age groups. During the first year of life, subthreshold and suprathreshold electrophysiological properties changed in a way that shows that pyramidal cells become less excitable with maturation, but also become temporarily more precise. According to our findings, the morphological features of the three-dimensional reconstructions from different life stages showed consistent morphological properties and systematic dendritic spine analysis of an infantile and an old pyramidal cell showed clear significant differences in the distribution of spine shapes. Overall, the changes that occur during development and aging may have lasting effects on the properties of pyramidal cells in the cerebral cortex. Understanding these changes is important to unravel the complex mechanisms underlying brain development, cognition, and age-related neurodegenerative diseases.

    1. Neuroscience
    Elissa Sutlief, Charlie Walters ... Marshall G Hussain Shuler
    Research Article

    Reward-rate maximization is a prominent normative principle in behavioral ecology, neuroscience, economics, and AI. Here, we identify, compare, and analyze equations to maximize reward rate when assessing whether to initiate a pursuit. In deriving expressions for the value of a pursuit, we show that time’s cost consists of both apportionment and opportunity cost. Reformulating value as a discounting function, we show precisely how a reward-rate-optimal agent’s discounting function (1) combines hyperbolic and linear components reflecting apportionment and opportunity costs, and (2) is dependent not only on the considered pursuit’s properties but also on time spent and rewards obtained outside the pursuit. This analysis reveals how purported signs of suboptimal behavior (hyperbolic discounting, and the Delay, Magnitude, and Sign effects) are in fact consistent with reward-rate maximization. To better account for observed decision-making errors in humans and animals, we then analyze the impact of misestimating reward-rate-maximizing parameters and find that suboptimal decisions likely stem from errors in assessing time’s apportionment—specifically, underweighting time spent outside versus inside a pursuit—which we term the ‘Malapportionment Hypothesis’. This understanding of the true pattern of temporal decision-making errors is essential to deducing the learning algorithms and representational architectures actually used by humans and animals.