In vivo electrophysiology requires direct access to brain tissue, necessitating the development and refinement of surgical procedures and techniques that promote the health and well-being of animal ...subjects. Here, we report a series of findings noted on structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans in monkeys with MRI-compatible implants following small craniotomies that provide access for intracranial electrophysiology. We found distinct brain regions exhibiting hyperintensities in T2-weighted scans that were prominent underneath the sites at which craniotomies had been performed. We interpreted these hyperintensities as edema of the neural tissue and found that they were predominantly present following electric and piezoelectric drilling, but not when manual, hand-operated drills were used. Furthermore, the anomalies subsided within 2-3 wk following surgery. Our report highlights the utility of MRI-compatible implants that promote clinical examination of the animal's brain, sometimes revealing findings that may go unnoticed when incompatible implants are used. We show replicable differences in outcome when using electric versus mechanical devices, both ubiquitous in the field. If electric drills are used, our report cautions against electrophysiological recordings from tissue directly underneath the craniotomy for the first 2-3 wk following the procedure due to putative edema.
Close examination of structural MRI in eight nonhuman primates following craniotomy surgeries for intracranial electrophysiology highlights a prevalence of hyperintensities on T2-weighted scans following surgeries conducted using electric and piezoelectric drills, but not when using mechanical, hand-operated drills. We interpret these anomalies as edema of neural tissue that resolved 2-3 wk postsurgery. This finding is especially of interest as electrophysiological recordings from compromised tissue may directly influence the integrity of collected data immediately following surgery.
Attention filters sensory inputs to enhance task-relevant information. It is guided by an “attentional template” that represents the stimulus features that are currently relevant. To understand how ...the brain learns and uses templates, we trained monkeys to perform a visual search task that required them to repeatedly learn new attentional templates. Neural recordings found that templates were represented across the prefrontal and parietal cortex in a structured manner, such that perceptually neighboring templates had similar neural representations. When the task changed, a new attentional template was learned by incrementally shifting the template toward rewarded features. Finally, we found that attentional templates transformed stimulus features into a common value representation that allowed the same decision-making mechanisms to deploy attention, regardless of the identity of the template. Altogether, our results provide insight into the neural mechanisms by which the brain learns to control attention and how attention can be flexibly deployed across tasks.
Display omitted
•Monkeys repeatedly learned new attentional templates to select visual stimuli•Neural representations of templates were structured in the prefrontal and parietal cortex•Attentional templates were iteratively updated after each trial based on reward feedback•Sensory inputs were translated into value, allowing attention to generalize across tasks
Jahn et al. show that the brain uses reward feedback to learn attentional templates that select task-relevant stimuli. Attended stimulus features were converted into a common value representation, allowing attentional control to generalize across tasks.
