Cortico-thalamic communication for action coordination in a skilled motor sequence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY The coordination of forelimb and orofacial movements to compose an ethological reach-to-consume behavior likely involves neural communication across brain regions. Leveraging wide-field imaging and photo-inhibition to survey across the cortex, we identified a cortical network and a high-order motor area (MOs-c), which coordinate action progression in a mouse reach-and-withdraw-to-drink (RWD) behavior. Electrophysiology and photo-inhibition across multiple projection neuron types within the MOs-c revealed differential contributions of pyramidal tract and corticothalamic (CT MOs ) output channels to action progression and hand-mouth coordination. Notably, CT MOs display sustained firing throughout RWD sequence and selectively enhance RWD-relevant activity in postsynaptic thalamus neurons, which also contribute to action coordination. CT MOs receive converging monosynaptic inputs from forelimb and orofacial sensorimotor areas and are reciprocally connected to thalamic neurons, which project back to the cortical network. Therefore, motor cortex corticothalamic channel may selectively amplify the thalamic integration of cortical and subcortical sensorimotor streams to coordinate a skilled motor sequence.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".