Neural mechanism of activity spread in the cat motor cortex and its relation to the intrinsic connectivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motor cortical points are linked by intrinsic horizontal connections having a recurrent network topology. However, it is not known whether neural activity can propagate over the area covered by these intrinsic connections and whether there are spatial anisotropies of synaptic strength, as opposed to synaptic density. Moreover, the mechanisms by which activity spreads have yet to be determined. To address these issues, an 8 × 8 microelectrode array was inserted in the forelimb area of the cat motor cortex (MCx). The centre of the array had a laser etched hole ∼500 μm in diameter. A microiontophoretic pipette, with a tip diameter of 2-3 μm, containing bicuculline methiodide (BIC) was inserted in the hole and driven to a depth of 1200-1400 μm from the cortical surface. BIC was ejected for ∼2min from the tip of the micropipette with positive direct current ranging between 20 and 40 nA in different experiments. This produced spontaneous nearly periodic bursts (0.2-1.0 Hz) of multi-unit activity in a radius of about 400 μm from the tip of the micropipette. The bursts of neural activity spread at a velocity of 0.11-0.24 ms⁻¹ (mean=0.14 mm ms⁻¹, SD=0.05)with decreasing amplitude.The area activated was on average 7.22 mm² (SD=0.91 mm²), or ∼92% of the area covered by the recording array. The mode of propagation was determined to occur by progressive recruitment of cortical territory, driven by a central locus of activity of some 400 μm in radius. Thus, activity did not propagate as a wave. Transection of the connections between the thalamus and MCx did not significantly alter the propagation velocity or the size of the recruited area, demonstrating that the bursts spread along the routes of intrinsic cortical connectivity. These experiments demonstrate that neural activity initiated within a small motor cortical locus (≤ 400 μm in radius) can recruit a relatively large neighbourhood in which a variety of muscles acting at several forelimb joints are represented. These results support the hypothesis that the MCx controls the forelimb musculature in an integrated and anticipatory manner based on a recurrent network topology
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".