Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Feb 20.
Published in final edited form as: Neuron. 2013 Feb 20;77(4):736–749. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.12.032

Figure 4.

Figure 4

The effects of NMDA vs. AMPAR blockade on the task-related firing of Cue and Response cells in the primate dlPFC. A. Example of a Cue cell under control conditions (blue) and following iontophoresis of the NMDA NR2B antagonist, Ro25-6891 (15nA; red). NMDA blockade significantly reduced task-related firing of the Cue cell. B. Example of a peri-saccadic Response cell under control conditions (blue) and following iontophoresis the AMPA antagonist, CNQX (25nA; green), and Ro25-6891 (25nA; red). Peri-saccadic-related firing of the Response cell was reduced by NMDA but not AMPAR blockade. C. Example of a Cue cell under control conditions (blue) and following iontophoresis of CNQX (25nA; green). AMPA blockade significantly reduced task-related firing of the Cue cell. D. Example of a post-saccadic Response cell under control conditions (blue) and following iontophoresis of CNQX (25nA; green). In contrast to the Response cell shown in 4B, the post-saccadic-related firing of this Response cell was reduced by AMPAR blockade.