GABA neurotransmission in the cerebellar interposed nuclei: involvement in classically conditioned eyeblinks and neuronal activity.

The cerebellar interposed nuclei (IN) are an essential part of circuits that control classically conditioned eyeblinks in the rabbit. The function of the IN is under the control of GABAergic projections from Purkinje cells of the cerebellar cortex. The exact involvement of cerebellar cortical input into the IN during eyeblink expression is not clear. While it is known that the application of gamma-aminobutyric acid-A (GABA(A)) agonists and antagonists affects the performance of classically conditioned eyeblinks, the effects of these drugs on IN neurons in vivo are not known. The purpose of the present study was to measure the effects of muscimol and picrotoxin on the expression of conditioned eyeblinks and the activity of IN cells simultaneously. Injections of muscimol abolished conditioned responses and either silenced or diminished the activity of IN cells. Two injections were administered in each picrotoxin experiment. The first injection of picrotoxin slightly modified the timing and amplitude of the eyeblink, produced mild tonic eyelid closure, increased tonic activity of IN cells, and reduced the amplitude of the neural responses. The second injection of picrotoxin abolished conditioned responses, further increased tonic eyelid closure, dramatically elevated the tonic activity of IN cells, and in most cases, abolished neuronal responses. These results demonstrate that both GABA(A)-mediated inactivation and tonic up-regulation of IN cells can interrupt the expression of conditioned eyeblinks and that this behavioral effect is accompanied by the suppression of the neuronal activity correlates of the conditioned stimulus and response.

[1]  Narender Ramnani,et al.  Reversible inactivations of the cerebellum with muscimol prevent the acquisition and extinction of conditioned nictitating membrane responses in the rabbit , 1996, Experimental Brain Research.

[2]  James R. Bloedel,et al.  Effects of muscimol inactivation of the cerebellar interposed-dentate nuclear complex on the performance of the nictitating membrane response in the rabbit , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[3]  J. W. Moore,et al.  Activity of deep cerebellar nuclear cells during classical conditioning of nictitating membrane extension in rabbits , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[4]  M. Glickstein,et al.  Classical conditioning of the nictitating membrane response of the rabbit , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[5]  Richard F. Thompson,et al.  Neural substrates of eyeblink conditioning: acquisition and retention. , 2003, Learning & memory.

[6]  Dieter Jaeger,et al.  The Contribution of NMDA and AMPA Conductances to the Control of Spiking in Neurons of the Deep Cerebellar Nuclei , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[7]  Magnus Ivarsson,et al.  Cerebellar Mechanisms in Eyeblink Conditioning , 2002, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[8]  An Experimental Study of Posterior Interpositus Involvement in the Genesis and Control of Conditioned Eyelid Responses , 2002, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[9]  Im Joo Rhyu,et al.  Bidirectional Alterations in Cerebellar Synaptic Transmission oftottering and rollingCa2+ Channel Mutant Mice , 2002, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[10]  M. Mauk,et al.  Inhibition of climbing fibres is a signal for the extinction of conditioned eyelid responses , 2002, Nature.

[11]  Richard F. Thompson,et al.  Cerebellar cortical inhibition and classical eyeblink conditioning , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[12]  C. Jahr,et al.  Multivesicular Release at Climbing Fiber-Purkinje Cell Synapses , 2001, Neuron.

[13]  C. Yeo,et al.  Acquisition of Eyeblink Conditioning Is Critically Dependent on Normal Function in Cerebellar Cortical Lobule HVI , 2001, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[14]  M. Mauk,et al.  A Mechanism for Savings in the Cerebellum , 2001, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[15]  Intermediate cerebellum and conditioned eyeblinks. Parallel involvement in eyeblinks and tonic eyelid closure. , 2001, Experimental brain research.

[16]  F. Tempia,et al.  Postsynaptic currents in deep cerebellar nuclei. , 2001, Journal of neurophysiology.

[17]  J. Steinmetz,et al.  Intra-cerebellar infusion of NMDA receptor antagonist AP5 disrupts classical eyeblink conditioning in rabbits , 2000, Brain Research.

[18]  M. Mauk,et al.  Mechanisms of cerebellar learning suggested by eyelid conditioning , 2000, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[19]  J. Steinmetz.  Brain substrates of classical eyeblink conditioning: a highly localized but also distributed system , 2000, Behavioural Brain Research.

[20]  J. Bloedel,et al.  Intermediate cerebellum and conditioned eyeblinks , 2000, Experimental Brain Research.

[21]  C. Yeo,et al.  Cerebellar Cortical AMPA–Kainate Receptor Blockade Prevents Performance of Classically Conditioned Nictitating Membrane Responses , 1999, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[22]  D. Linden,et al.  Regulation of the rebound depolarization and spontaneous firing patterns of deep nuclear neurons in slices of rat cerebellum. , 1999, Journal of neurophysiology.

[23]  M. Mauk,et al.  Pharmacological analysis of cerebellar contributions to the timing and expression of conditioned eyelid responses , 1998, Neuropharmacology.

[24]  D J Krupa,et al.  Reversible inactivation of the cerebellar interpositus nucleus completely prevents acquisition of the classically conditioned eye-blink response. , 1997, Learning & memory.

[25]  R F Thompson,et al.  Memory systems in the brain and localization of a memory. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[26]  N Ramnani,et al.  Reversible inactivations of the cerebellum prevent the extinction of conditioned nictitating membrane responses in rabbits. , 1996, The Journal of physiology.

[27]  S. Lisberger,et al.  The Cerebellum: A Neuronal Learning Machine? , 1996, Science.

[28]  S. Bao,et al.  Impaired classical eyeblink conditioning in cerebellar-lesioned and Purkinje cell degeneration (pcd) mutant mice , 1996, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[29]  B. Gähwiler,et al.  Presynaptic GABAB receptors modulate IPSPs evoked in neurons of deep cerebellar nuclei in vitro. , 1996, Journal of neurophysiology.

[30]  Richard F. Thompson,et al.  Localization of a memory trace in the mammalian brain. , 1993, Science.

[31]  M. Mauk,et al.  Cerebellar cortex lesions disrupt learning-dependent timing of conditioned eyelid responses , 1993, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[32]  R. F. Thompson,et al.  Disruption of classical eyelid conditioning after cerebellar lesions: damage to a memory trace system or a simple performance deficit? , 1992, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[33]  C. Yeo,et al.  The Effect of Kainic Acid Lesions of the Cerebellar Cortex on the Conditioned Nictitating Membrane Response in the Rabbit , 1992, The European journal of neuroscience.

[34]  B. Gähwiler,et al.  Excitatory synaptic potentials in neurons of the deep nuclei in olivo-cerebellar slice cultures , 1992, Neuroscience.

[35]  J. Harvey,et al.  Pavlovian conditioning in the rabbit during inactivation of the interpositus nucleus. , 1991, The Journal of physiology.

[36]  Richard F. Thompson,et al.  Effects of lidocaine injection in the interpositus nucleus and red nucleus on conditioned behavioral and neuronal responses , 1990, Brain Research.

[37]  B. Gähwiler,et al.  Responses to excitatory amino acids of Purkinje cells' and neurones of the deep nuclei in cerebellar slice cultures. , 1990, The Journal of physiology.

[38]  J. Watkins,et al.  Experiments with kainate and quisqualate agonists and antagonists in relation to the sub-classification of 'non-NMDA' receptors. , 1990, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[39]  G. Lynch,et al.  The neurobiology of learning and memory , 1989, Cognition.

[40]  R. Llinás,et al.  Electrophysiology of guinea‐pig cerebellar nuclear cells in the in vitro brain stem‐cerebellar preparation. , 1988, The Journal of physiology.

[41]  R. F. Thompson,et al.  Initial localization of the acoustic conditioned stimulus projection system to the cerebellum essential for classical eyelid conditioning. , 1987, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[42]  J. Madden,et al.  Cerebellar GABAergic processes: evidence for critical involvement in a form of simple associative learning in the rabbit. , 1987, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[43]  Masao Ito.  The Cerebellum And Neural Control , 1984 .

[44]  R. F. Thompson,et al.  Cerebellum: essential involvement in the classically conditioned eyelid response. , 1984, Science.

[45]  David A. McCormick,et al.  Ipsilateral cerebellar lesions prevent learning of the classically conditioned nictitating membrane/eyelid response , 1982, Brain Research.

[46]  G. A. Clark,et al.  Initial localization of the memory trace for a basic form of learning. , 1982, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[47]  A. R. Freeman,et al.  Electrophysiological analysis of the actions of strychnine, bicuculline and picrotoxin on the axonal membrane. , 1973, Journal of neurobiology.