Rotational dynamics in motor cortex are consistent with a feedback controller

  1. Hari Teja Kalidindi
  2. Kevin P Cross  Is a corresponding author
  3. Timothy P Lillicrap
  4. Mohsen Omrani
  5. Egidio Falotico
  6. Philip N Sabes
  7. Stephen H Scott
  1. Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Italy
  2. Queen's University, Canada
  3. University College London, United Kingdom
  4. University of California, San Francisco, United States

Abstract

Recent studies have identified rotational dynamics in motor cortex (MC) which many assume arise from intrinsic connections in MC. However, behavioural and neurophysiological studies suggest that MC behaves like a feedback controller where continuous sensory feedback and interactions with other brain areas contribute substantially to MC processing. We investigated these apparently conflicting theories by building recurrent neural networks that controlled a model arm and received sensory feedback from the limb. Networks were trained to counteract perturbations to the limb and to reach towards spatial targets. Network activities and sensory feedback signals to the network exhibited rotational structure even when the recurrent connections were removed. Furthermore, neural recordings in monkeys performing similar tasks also exhibited rotational structure not only in MC but also in somatosensory cortex. Our results argue that rotational structure may also reflect dynamics throughout the voluntary motor system involved in online control of motor actions.

Data availability

Upon publication the neural network code will be made publicly available athttps://github.com/Hteja/CorticalDynamics. Data and analysis code will be made publicly available at https://github.com/kevincross/CorticalDynamicsAnalysis.

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Hari Teja Kalidindi

    The BioRobotics Institute, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2634-7953
  2. Kevin P Cross

    Centre for Neuroscience Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
    For correspondence
    13kc18@queensu.ca
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9820-1043
  3. Timothy P Lillicrap

    Centre for Computation, Mathematics and Physics, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Mohsen Omrani

    Centre for Neuroscience Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0461-1947
  5. Egidio Falotico

    The BioRobotics Institute, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Philip N Sabes

    Department of Physiology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8397-6225
  7. Stephen H Scott

    Centre for Neuroscience Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
    Competing interests
    Stephen H Scott, Co-founder and CSO of Kinarm which commercializes the robotic technology used in the present study..
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8821-1843

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research (PJT-159559)

  • Stephen H Scott

European Union's Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (785907 (Human Brain Project SGA2))

  • Egidio Falotico

European Union's Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (945539 (Human Brain Project SGA3).)

  • Egidio Falotico

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: Studies were approved by the Queen's University Research Ethics Board and Animal Care Committee (#Scott-2010-035)

Copyright

© 2021, Kalidindi 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

  • 4,788
    views
  • 738
    downloads
  • 59
    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. Hari Teja Kalidindi
  2. Kevin P Cross
  3. Timothy P Lillicrap
  4. Mohsen Omrani
  5. Egidio Falotico
  6. Philip N Sabes
  7. Stephen H Scott
(2021)
Rotational dynamics in motor cortex are consistent with a feedback controller
eLife 10:e67256.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.67256

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.67256

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Computational and Systems Biology
    Shinichi Kawaguchi, Xin Xu ... Toshie Kai
    Research Article

    Protein–protein interactions are fundamental to understanding the molecular functions and regulation of proteins. Despite the availability of extensive databases, many interactions remain uncharacterized due to the labor-intensive nature of experimental validation. In this study, we utilized the AlphaFold2 program to predict interactions among proteins localized in the nuage, a germline-specific non-membrane organelle essential for piRNA biogenesis in Drosophila. We screened 20 nuage proteins for 1:1 interactions and predicted dimer structures. Among these, five represented novel interaction candidates. Three pairs, including Spn-E_Squ, were verified by co-immunoprecipitation. Disruption of the salt bridges at the Spn-E_Squ interface confirmed their functional importance, underscoring the predictive model’s accuracy. We extended our analysis to include interactions between three representative nuage components—Vas, Squ, and Tej—and approximately 430 oogenesis-related proteins. Co-immunoprecipitation verified interactions for three pairs: Mei-W68_Squ, CSN3_Squ, and Pka-C1_Tej. Furthermore, we screened the majority of Drosophila proteins (~12,000) for potential interaction with the Piwi protein, a central player in the piRNA pathway, identifying 164 pairs as potential binding partners. This in silico approach not only efficiently identifies potential interaction partners but also significantly bridges the gap by facilitating the integration of bioinformatics and experimental biology.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Brian DePasquale, Carlos D Brody, Jonathan W Pillow
    Research Article Updated

    Accumulating evidence to make decisions is a core cognitive function. Previous studies have tended to estimate accumulation using either neural or behavioral data alone. Here, we develop a unified framework for modeling stimulus-driven behavior and multi-neuron activity simultaneously. We applied our method to choices and neural recordings from three rat brain regions—the posterior parietal cortex (PPC), the frontal orienting fields (FOF), and the anterior-dorsal striatum (ADS)—while subjects performed a pulse-based accumulation task. Each region was best described by a distinct accumulation model, which all differed from the model that best described the animal’s choices. FOF activity was consistent with an accumulator where early evidence was favored while the ADS reflected near perfect accumulation. Neural responses within an accumulation framework unveiled a distinct association between each brain region and choice. Choices were better predicted from all regions using a comprehensive, accumulation-based framework and different brain regions were found to differentially reflect choice-related accumulation signals: FOF and ADS both reflected choice but ADS showed more instances of decision vacillation. Previous studies relating neural data to behaviorally inferred accumulation dynamics have implicitly assumed that individual brain regions reflect the whole-animal level accumulator. Our results suggest that different brain regions represent accumulated evidence in dramatically different ways and that accumulation at the whole-animal level may be constructed from a variety of neural-level accumulators.