Figure 2. Mice can discriminate between fluctuating odor stimuli based on intermittency values.
(A) Go/No-Go intermittency discrimination task structure. Animals are presented with a 6 s odor stimulus following a 1.5 s delay and after the odor presentation have a 1.5 s decision period during which, if they lick for a CS+, they receive a water reward, and if they lick for a CS-, they receive a punishment in the form of an increased ITI. Left: Imaging and odor delivery setup. Mice are delivered odor through a tube in front of their nose and sniffing is recorded through a pressure sensor inserted into the odor tube. Glomerular activity in the dorsal olfactory bulb is imaged using wide-field calcium imaging. (B) Mouse performance on intermittency discrimination task. At gain 1, mice perform significantly above chance at intermittency values of 0.3 and above (one-tailed t-test, Bonferroni correction, p<0.0001, n=48 sessions) for all stimulus types. At gain 0.5, mice perform above chance at intermittency values 0.4 and above, naturalistic and square-wave, 0.5 and above, binary naturalistic (one-tailed t-test, Bonferroni correction, p<0.0001, n=48 sessions). (C) Hit rates (HR) and false alarm (FA) rates of mice performing the intermittency discrimination task with and without odor. Two-sample t-tests. Naturalistic: μ HROdor=0.87±0.006, μHRNoOdor=0.23±0.055, p<0.0001, μFAOdor=0.18±0.013, μFANoOdor=0.20±0.039, p=0.64, binary naturalistic: μHROdor=0.89±0.009, μHRNoOdor=0.18±0.068, p<0.0001, μFAOdor=0.18±0.008, μFANoOdor=0.19±0.061, p=0.75, square-wave: μHROdor=0.86±0.007, μHRNoOdor=0.23±0.071, p<0.0001, μFAOdor=0.18±0.006, μFANoOdor=0.21±0.065, p=0.67.

