Therefore the choice-aligned excitation was not caused by these later sensory events. To analyze the choice-aligned

excitation, we used a time window (gray area in Figure 6B) that does not contain the timing of the chosen feedback or reward delivery. The choice-aligned excitation increased as the search array size increased. This was statistically shown by a significant positive correlation between the magnitude of the excitation and the search array size in the DMS task (large reward trials, p < 0.01; small reward trials, p < 0.01; Wilcoxon signed-rank test) (Figure 6C). Comparing the correlation coefficients in the two tasks for each neuron (Figure 6D), the correlation was significantly greater in the DMS task than in the control Selleckchem AZD2281 task, especially for the large reward trials (large reward trials, p < 0.01; small reward trials, p > 0.05; Wilcoxon signed-rank this website test). These data suggest that the choice-aligned excitation was enhanced when the monkey found a correct target in the difficult search condition and when the large reward was expected. The choice-aligned excitation was observed even in error choice trials in which the monkey chose a wrong object (i.e., nontarget distracter) (Figure 7A). The averaged activity was aligned by the onset of the choice behavior in which the monkey

chose a wrong object in the six-size array condition. The magnitude of this excitation was significantly larger than zero in both the large reward trials (mean ± SD = 1.4 ± 4.1 spikes/s, p < 0.01, Wilcoxon signed-rank test) and the small reward trials (mean ± SD = 2.0 ± 4.5 spikes/s, p < 0.01, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). Thus, these neurons would be excited when the monkey identified an object as a correct target, even if it was not actually the correct target. Consistent with this idea, no excitation was observed when the monkey temporarily looked at a nontarget distracter and subsequently Phosphoprotein phosphatase changed his gaze to choose

another object (Figure 7B). The averaged activity was aligned by the time when monkey’s eye position entered into a nontarget window (distractor window), subsequently stayed in the window for more than 100 ms, and then went to another window. The averaged activity is shown for two cases: one for the last eye entrance before final choice (Figure 7B, right), and one for the second last eye entrance before final choice (Figure 7B, left). In either case, significant excitation or inhibition was not observed (last before final choice, large reward trials, mean ± SD = 0.4 ± 2.2 spikes/s, p > 0.05, small reward trials, mean ± SD = −0.2 ± 2.6 spikes/s, p > 0.05; second last before final choice, large reward trials, mean ± SD = 0.0 ± 3.7 spikes/s, p > 0.05, small reward trials, mean ± SD = −0.3 ± 2.8 spikes/s, p > 0.05; Wilcoxon signed-rank test).