Summary Primate motor cortex projects to spinal interneurons and motor neurons, suggesting that motor cortex activity may be dominated by muscle-like commands. Extensive observations during reaching lend support to this view, but evidence remains ambiguous and much-debated. To provide a different perspective, we employed a novel behavioral paradigm that affords extensive comparison between time-evolving neural and muscle activity. We found that single motor cortex neurons displayed many muscle-like properties, but the structure of population activity was not muscle-like. Unlike muscle activity, neural activity was structured to avoid ‘tangling’: moments where similar activity patterns led to dissimilar future patterns. Avoidance of tangling was present across tasks and species. Network models revealed a potential reason for this consistent feature: low tangling confers noise robustness. Finally, we were able to predict motor cortex activity from muscle activity alone, by leveraging the hypothesis that muscle-like commands are embedded in additional structure that yields low tangling.

Neural activity in monkey motor cortex (M1) and dorsal premotor cortex (PMd) can reflect a chosen movement well before that movement begins. The pattern of neural activity then changes profoundly just before movement onset. We considered the prediction, derived from formal considerations, that the transition from preparation to movement might be accompanied by a large overall change in the neural state that reflects when movement is made rather than which movement is made. Specifically, we examined “components” of the population response: time-varying patterns of activity from which each neuron’s response is approximately composed. Amid the response complexity of individual M1 and PMd neurons, we identified robust response components that were “condition-invariant”: their magnitude and time course were nearly identical regardless of reach direction or path. These condition-invariant response components occupied dimensions orthogonal to those occupied by the “tuned” response components. The largest condition-invariant component was much larger than any of the tuned components; i.e., it explained more of the structure in individual-neuron responses. This condition-invariant response component underwent a rapid change before movement onset. The timing of that change predicted most of the trial-by-trial variance in reaction time. Thus, although individual M1 and PMd neurons essentially always reflected which movement was made, the largest component of the population response reflected movement timing rather than movement type.

SUMMARY Blocking motor cortical output with lesions or pharmacological inactivation has identified movements that require motor cortex. Yet when and how motor cortex influences muscle activity during movement execution remains unresolved. We addressed this ambiguity using measurement and perturbation of motor cortical activity together with electromyography in mice during two forelimb movements that differ in their requirement for cortical involvement. Rapid optogenetic silencing and electrical stimulation indicated that short-latency pathways linking motor cortex with spinal motor neurons are selectively activated during one behavior. Analysis of motor cortical activity revealed a dramatic change between behaviors in the coordination of firing patterns across neurons that could account for this differential influence. Thus, our results suggest that changes in motor cortical output patterns enable a behaviorally-selective engagement of short-latency effector pathways. The model of motor cortical influence implied by our findings helps reconcile previous observations on the function of motor cortex.

Binocular rivalry is a phenomenon that occurs when a different image is presented to each eye. The observer generally perceives just one image at a time, with perceptual switches occurring every few seconds. A natural assumption is that this perceptual mutual exclusivity is achieved via mutual inhibition between populations of neurons that encode for either percept. Theoretical models that incorporate mutual inhibition have been largely successful at capturing experimental features of rivalry, including Levelt's propositions, which characterize perceptual dominance durations as a function of image contrasts. However, basic mutual inhibition models do not fully comply with Levelt's fourth proposition, which states that percepts alternate faster as the stimulus contrasts to both eyes are increased simultaneously. This theory-experiment discrepancy has been taken as evidence against the role of mutual inhibition for binocular rivalry. Here, we show how various biophysically plausible modifications to mutual inhibition models can resolve this problem.