Different inhibitory interneuron cell classes make distinct contributions to visual perception
preprint
OA: closed
Abstract
Summary While recent work has revealed how different inhibitory interneurons influence cortical responses to sensory stimuli, little is known about how their activity contributes to sensory perception. Here, we optogenetically stimulated different genetically defined interneurons (parvalbumin (PV), somatostatin (SST), vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP)) in visual cortex (V1) of mice working at threshold in contrast increment or decrement detection tasks. The visual stimulus was paired with optogenetic stimulation to assess how enhancing V1 inhibitory neuron activity synchronously during cortical responses altered task performance. PV or SST activation impaired, while VIP stimulation improved, contrast increment detection. Notably, PV or SST stimulation also impaired contrast decrement detection, when opsin-evoked inhibition would exaggerate stimulus-evoked decrements in firing rate, and thus might improve performance. The impairment produced by PV or SST stimulation persisted throughout many weeks of testing. In contrast mice learned to reliably detect VIP activation in the absence of natural visual stimulation. Thus, different inhibitory signals make distinct contributions to visual contrast perception.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.
References (36)
- doi:10.1038/nature11526 via crossref
- doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002074 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2011.11.013 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2011.12.013 via crossref
- doi:10.1038/nrc3398 via crossref
- doi:10.1523/jneurosci.2624-13.2013 via crossref
- doi:10.1523/jneurosci.08-04-01172.1988 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/j.cell.2014.01.050 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/j.visres.2010.09.027 via crossref
- doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3560-13.2013 via crossref
- doi:10.1038/nprot.2014.165 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2013.10.020 via crossref
- doi:10.1073/pnas.1318750111 via crossref
- doi:10.1152/jn.00609.2011 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2017.06.019 via crossref
- doi:10.1038/nmeth.2836 via crossref
- doi:10.1038/nature11312 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2011.06.017 via crossref
- doi:10.1038/nn.4266 via crossref
- doi:10.1038/nrn1519 via crossref
- doi:10.1126/science.aag2599 via crossref
- doi:10.1073/pnas.1936192100 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2009.03.028 via crossref
- doi:10.1038/nn.3446 via crossref
- doi:10.7554/elife.12248 via crossref
- doi:10.1038/nature12676 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2008.02.005 via crossref
- doi:10.1093/cercor/bhv202 via crossref
- doi:10.1002/dneu.20853 via crossref
- doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0963-17.2017 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/0166-2236(92)90017-3 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2015.09.013 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2011.07.026 via crossref
- doi:10.1523/jneurosci.17-11-04382.1997 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2017.06.050 via crossref
- doi:10.1038/nature11347 via crossref
Source provenance
- crossref
- last seen: 2026-06-06T01:00:28.807193+00:00
- europepmc
- last seen: 2026-05-19T01:45:01.086888+00:00
- unpaywall
- last seen: 2026-07-13T06:45:44.122212+00:00