Reversible inactivation of the cerebellar interpositus nucleus completely prevents acquisition of the classically conditioned eye-blink response.

Numerous studies from several laboratories report that temporary inactivation of the cerebellar interpositus nucleus and regions of overlying cortex during eye-blink conditioning completely prevents acquisition of the conditioned eye-blink response (CR) without affecting the ability to learn the CR in subsequent training without inactivation. Recently, these results have been challenged by the suggestion that learning was not completely blocked in these studies. Instead, it has been suggested that low levels of responses on test sessions might represent a retarded form of learning caused by drug effects on cerebellar cortex. The present study was designed to address this issue directly. Very low doses of muscimol were used to selectively inactivate the interpositus nucleus of rabbits during five conditioning sessions. Animals performed no significant levels of CRs during those sessions. Training was continued four more sessions without any inactivations to test whether any learning had occurred during the previous five sessions. Detailed analysis of responses during session six revealed that learning was completely blocked by the low doses of muscimol infused into the interpositus during the first five sessions. Animals subsequently acquired the CR normally. These results confirm and extend the original findings that appropriate lesions (either temporary or permanent) of the interpositus nucleus completely prevent acquisition of the conditioned eye-blink response. Other issues regarding reversible inactivation studies are also discussed.

[1]  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.

[2]  R. Wurtz,et al.  Modification of saccadic eye movements by GABA-related substances. I. Effect of muscimol and bicuculline in monkey superior colliculus. , 1985, Journal of neurophysiology.

[3]  S G Lisberger,et al.  The neural basis for learning of simple motor skills. , 1988, Science.

[4]  B. Knowlton,et al.  Classical conditioning of the rabbit eyelid response with a mossy-fiber stimulation CS: II. Lateral reticular nucleus stimulation. , 1987, Behavioral neuroscience.

[5]  Scott T. Grafton,et al.  Functional anatomy of human eyeblink conditioning determined with regional cerebral glucose metabolism and positron-emission tomography. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[6]  A. F. Nordholm,et al.  The Conditioned Eyeblink Response: A Role for the GABA-B Receptor? , 1997, Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior.

[7]  J. Albus A Theory of Cerebellar Function , 1971 .

[8]  R. F. Thompson,et al.  Classical conditioning using stimulation of the inferior olive as the unconditioned stimulus. , 1986, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  R. Clark,et al.  Reversible lesions of the cerebellar interpositus nucleus during acquisition and retention of a classically conditioned behavior. , 1992, Behavioral neuroscience.

[10]  D. Marr A theory of cerebellar cortex , 1969, The Journal of physiology.

[11]  C. Yeo Cerebellum and Classical Conditioning of Motor Responses , 1991, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

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

[13]  R. F. Thompson,et al.  Neuronal responses of the rabbit cerebellum during acquisition and performance of a classically conditioned nictitating membrane-eyelid response , 1984, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[14]  M. Mauk,et al.  Extinction of conditioned eyelid responses requires the anterior lobe of cerebellar cortex , 1995, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[15]  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.

[16]  R. F. Thompson,et al.  Mammalian brain substrates of aversive classical conditioning. , 1993, Annual review of psychology.

[17]  A. F. Nordholm,et al.  Lidocaine infusion in a critical region of cerebellum completely prevents learning of the conditioned eyeblink response. , 1993, Behavioral neuroscience.

[18]  W T Thach,et al.  Basal ganglia motor control. III. Pallidal ablation: normal reaction time, muscle cocontraction, and slow movement. , 1991, Journal of neurophysiology.

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

[20]  D J Krupa,et al.  Inactivation of brainstem motor nuclei blocks expression but not acquisition of the rabbit's classically conditioned eyeblink response. , 1996, Behavioral neuroscience.

[21]  John H. Martin Autoradiographic estimation of the extent of reversible inactivation produced by microinjection of lidocaine and muscimol in the rat , 1991, Neuroscience Letters.

[22]  R. F. Thompson,et al.  Organization of memory traces in the mammalian brain. , 1994, Annual review of neuroscience.

[23]  R. F. Thompson,et al.  Effect of kainic acid lesions of the cerebellar interpositus nucleus on eyelid conditioning in the rabbit , 1985, Brain Research.

[24]  J. Gabrieli,et al.  Functional Mapping of Human Learning: A Positron Emission Tomography Activation Study of Eyeblink Conditioning , 1996, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[25]  H Collewijn,et al.  Depression of the vestibulo-ocular and optokinetic responses by intrafloccular microinjection of GABA-A and GABA-B agonists in the rabbit. , 1989, Archives italiennes de biologie.

[26]  J. Bloedel,et al.  On the cerebellum, cutaneomuscular reflexes, movement control and the elusive engrams of memory , 1995, Behavioural Brain Research.

[27]  R. F. Thompson,et al.  Classical conditioning in rabbits using pontine nucleus stimulation as a conditioned stimulus and inferior olive stimulation as an unconditioned stimulus , 1989, Synapse.

[28]  R. Wurtz,et al.  Modification of saccadic eye movements by GABA-related substances. II. Effects of muscimol in monkey substantia nigra pars reticulata. , 1985, Journal of neurophysiology.

[29]  D J Rosen,et al.  Classical conditioning of the rabbit eyelid response with a mossy-fiber stimulation CS: I. Pontine nuclei and middle cerebellar peduncle stimulation. , 1986, Behavioral neuroscience.

[30]  D J Krupa,et al.  Inactivation of the superior cerebellar peduncle blocks expression but not acquisition of the rabbit's classically conditioned eye-blink response. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

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

[32]  W T Thach,et al.  The cerebellum and the adaptive coordination of movement. , 1992, Annual review of neuroscience.

[33]  R. Clark,et al.  Reversible lesions of the red nucleus during acquisition and retention of a classically conditioned behavior in rabbits. , 1993, Behavioral neuroscience.

[34]  B. Schreurs,et al.  A functional anatomical study of associative learning in humans. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[35]  C. Ghez,et al.  Red nucleus and motor cortex: Parallel motor systems for the initiation and control of skilled movement , 1988, Behavioural Brain Research.

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