Figure 2. Connectivity index (CI) during resting-state and NREM sleep.

(A, B) show the CI within the learning and the consolidated patterns, respectively, averaged across subjects during the resting-state conditions before (RS1) and after (RS2) the training session (S1), as well as on the following morning before retest (RS3). The learning pattern’s CI was significantly increased in the MSL immediately following training (RS2), while the consolidated pattern’s CI increased significantly only post-sleep (RS3) in the MSL as compared to the CTL condition. (C, D) show, respectively, CI within the learning and the consolidated patterns averaged across subjects during NREM sleep. Only the consolidated pattern’s CI differed significantly between the MSL and CTL nights. Error bars represent s.e.m.; * and ** indicate ${\displaystyle \mathrm{p}<0.05}$ and ${\displaystyle \mathrm{p}<0.01}$, respectively.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.24987.008

Figure 2—figure supplement 1. The group-level spatial maps of four highly-reproducible brain networks extracted during the MSL task.

Each row shows a spatial map extracted from the application of independent component analysis (ICA) on the time-concatenated data of the learning (S1) and retest (S2) sessions during the MSL task across all subjects. The label for each component is provided on the left. Color-coded activation maps indicate Z-score values.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.24987.009

Figure 2—figure supplement 2. Connectivity index (CI) during resting-state periods within the four control networks reported in Figure 2—figure supplement 1.

(a–d) show the CI within the default mode, visual, left and right fronto-parietal networks, respectively, averaged across subjects during the resting-state conditions before (RS1) and after (RS2) the training session (S1), as well as on the following morning before retest (RS3). No significant difference in CI between MSL and CTL tasks was observed in any of the four control networks (p>0.2, in all cases). Error bars represent s.e.m.; n.s. indicates not significant interaction.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.24987.010

Figure 2—figure supplement 3. Connectivity index (CI) during non-REM (NREM) sleep within the four control networks reported in Figure 2—figure supplement 1.

(a–d) show the CI within the default mode, visual, left and right fronto-parietal networks, respectively, averaged across subjects during NREM sleep. No significant difference in CI between MSL and CTL tasks was observed in any of the four control networks (p>0.3, in all cases). Error bars represent s.e.m.; n.s. indicates not significant paired t-statistics.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.24987.011