Consequently, there was a suppression of the delta power present in the STA-LFP with vM1 stimulation selleck chemicals llc in both control conditions (STA-LFP delta power:

86% ± 3% reduction, p < 0.0001) and after thalamic suppression (75% ± 8% reduction, p < 0.05). Thus, while thalamocortical interactions strongly influence S1 network activity, corticocortical signaling can modulate S1 dynamics independent of the thalamus. Considering the ability of vM1 activity to modulate S1 state, we next asked how this modulation may impact sensory processing. In waking mice, we recorded S1 responses to discrete whisker stimuli before (control) and during muscimol suppression of vM1 (n = 6). In control conditions, Dolutegravir cost whisker stimuli evoked monophasic MUA and LFP responses (Figures 7A and 7C). In contrast, during

vM1 suppression the same stimuli evoked biphasic MUA and LFP responses (Figures 7B and 7C). These latter signals consisted of onset increases in spiking, followed by prolonged spike suppression and positive-going LFP rebound potentials lasting hundreds of milliseconds. Consequently, S1 LFP delta power throughout the response period was enhanced 272% ± 61% during vM1 suppression (p < 0.05) (Figure 7D). We conducted a complementary set of experiments in anesthetized mice, briefly deflecting the principal whisker with or without pairing to vM1 stimulation (n = 7). In control conditions, single sensory stimuli evoked long-lasting rebound responses (Figure 7E), similar to vM1 suppression conditions in waking mice. Pairing of vM1 stimulation with sensory stimuli abolished the rebound responses, resulting in a 66% ± 5% reduction in S1 LFP delta power during the response period (p < 0.001) (Figure 7F). Thus, vM1 modulation of S1 spontaneous activity those was strongly reflected in sensory responses, with enhanced vM1 activity reducing biphasic, low-frequency S1 sensory responses. We reasoned that the temporal characteristics of sensory responses may significantly affect the ability to encode and discriminate

complex stimuli. Specifically, we hypothesized that when S1 network activity is dominated by spontaneous bursts of action potential activity, underlying the low frequencies of the local field potential, it would be less capable of reliably representing diverse sensory patterns. To test this, we constructed a set of stimulus patterns consisting of ten short duration whisker deflections of varying velocity at 10 Hz (see Experimental Procedures; Figure 8A) and applied these stimuli to anesthetized mice to enable precise, repeated delivery in the absence of spontaneous whisking. Each pattern was delivered to the principal whisker with and without pairing to vM1 stimulation while recording S1 network responses (n = 7). As observed in Figure 8B, pairing vM1 stimulation with sensory stimuli highly constrained the S1 responses.