Temporal patterns of inputs to cerebellum necessary and sufficient for trace eyelid conditioning.

Trace eyelid conditioning is a form of associative learning that requires several forebrain structures and cerebellum. Previous work suggests that at least two conditioned stimulus (CS)-driven signals are available to the cerebellum via mossy fiber inputs during trace conditioning: one driven by and terminating with the tone and a second driven by medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) that persists through the stimulus-free trace interval to overlap in time with the unconditioned stimulus (US). We used electric stimulation of mossy fibers to determine whether this pattern of dual inputs is necessary and sufficient for cerebellar learning to express normal trace eyelid responses. We find that presenting the cerebellum with one input that mimics persistent activity observed in mPFC and the lateral pontine nuclei during trace eyelid conditioning and another that mimics tone-elicited mossy fiber activity is sufficient to produce responses whose properties quantitatively match trace eyelid responses using a tone. Probe trials with each input delivered separately provide evidence that the cerebellum learns to respond to the mPFC-like input (that overlaps with the US) and learns to suppress responding to the tone-like input (that does not). This contributes to precisely timed responses and the well-documented influence of tone offset on the timing of trace responses. Computer simulations suggest that the underlying cerebellar mechanisms involve activation of different subsets of granule cells during the tone and during the stimulus-free trace interval. These results indicate that tone-driven and mPFC-like inputs are necessary and sufficient for the cerebellum to learn well-timed trace conditioned responses.

[1]  J. Disterhoft,et al.  Eyeblink conditioning, motor control, and the analysis of limbic-cerebellar interactions. , 1996 .

[2]  B. Oswald,et al.  Prefrontal control of trace versus delay eyeblink conditioning: role of the unconditioned stimulus in rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). , 2006, Behavioral neuroscience.

[3]  M. Mauk,et al.  Simulations of Cerebellar Motor Learning: Computational Analysis of Plasticity at the Mossy Fiber to Deep Nucleus Synapse , 1999, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[4]  E. De Schutter,et al.  Deletion of FMR1 in Purkinje Cells Enhances Parallel Fiber LTD, Enlarges Spines, and Attenuates Cerebellar Eyelid Conditioning in Fragile X Syndrome , 2005, Neuron.

[5]  J. Disterhoft,et al.  Where is the trace in trace conditioning? , 2008, Trends in Neurosciences.

[6]  Michael D Mauk,et al.  Cerebellar cortex contributions to the expression and timing of conditioned eyelid responses. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[7]  M. Mauk,et al.  Learning-Induced Plasticity in Deep Cerebellar Nucleus , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[8]  M. Mauk,et al.  Interactions between prefrontal cortex and cerebellum revealed by trace eyelid conditioning. , 2009, Learning & memory.

[9]  John H Freeman,et al.  Developmental changes in eyeblink conditioning and neuronal activity in the pontine nuclei. , 2003, Learning & memory.

[10]  E. Kehoe,et al.  In the Blink of an Eye: Real-Time Stimulus Factors in Delay and Trace Conditioning of the Rabbit's Nictitating Membrane Response , 1991, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. B, Comparative and physiological psychology.

[11]  Richard F. Thompson,et al.  Retention of classically conditioned eyelid responses following acute decerebration , 1987, Brain Research.

[12]  T. Pasternak,et al.  Working memory in primate sensory systems , 2005, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

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

[14]  April E Hebert,et al.  A role for the prefrontal cortex in recall of recent and remote memories , 2006, Neuroreport.

[15]  B. McNaughton,et al.  Spontaneous Changes of Neocortical Code for Associative Memory During Consolidation , 2008, Science.

[16]  Javier F. Medina,et al.  Timing Mechanisms in the Cerebellum: Testing Predictions of a Large-Scale Computer Simulation , 2000, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[17]  Bruce L. McNaughton,et al.  Spontaneous changes of neocortical code for associative memory during consolidation , 2008, Neuroscience Research.

[18]  D. Kleinfeld,et al.  Reversing cerebellar long-term depression , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  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.

[20]  J. Steinmetz,et al.  Dorsal accessory inferior olive activity diminishes during acquisition of the rabbit classically conditioned eyelid response , 1991, Brain Research.

[21]  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.

[22]  P. Goldman-Rakic.  Cellular basis of working memory , 1995, Neuron.

[23]  D. Pandya,et al.  Prefrontal cortex projections to the basilar pons in rhesus monkey: implications for the cerebellar contribution to higher function , 1995, Neuroscience Letters.

[24]  R. F. Thompson,et al.  Hippocampus and trace conditioning of the rabbit's classically conditioned nictitating membrane response. , 1986, Behavioral neuroscience.

[25]  H. C. Hulscher,et al.  Cerebellar LTD and Learning-Dependent Timing of Conditioned Eyelid Responses , 2003, Science.

[26]  D. Powell,et al.  Efferent connections of the medial prefrontal cortex in the rabbit , 1994, Experimental Brain Research.

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

[28]  G. Hesslow.  Correspondence between climbing fibre input and motor output in eyeblink‐related areas in cat cerebellar cortex. , 1994, The Journal of physiology.

[29]  David G. Lavond,et al.  Trace conditioning: Abolished by cerebellar nuclear lesions but not lateral cerebellar cortex aspirations , 1985, Brain Research.

[30]  M. Mauk,et al.  Cerebellar Cortex Lesions Prevent Acquisition of Conditioned Eyelid Responses , 1999, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[31]  J. Disterhoft,et al.  Caudate Nucleus Is Critically Involved in Trace Eyeblink Conditioning , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[32]  S Kawahara,et al.  Classical eyeblink conditioning in glutamate receptor subunit δ2 mutant mice is impaired in the delay paradigm but not in the trace paradigm , 2001, The European journal of neuroscience.

[33]  I. Raman,et al.  Mechanisms of Potentiation of Mossy Fiber EPSCs in the Cerebellar Nuclei by Coincident Synaptic Excitation and Inhibition , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[34]  Masao Ito,et al.  Long-lasting depression of parallel fiber-Purkinje cell transmission induced by conjunctive stimulation of parallel fibers and climbing fibers in the cerebellar cortex , 1982, Neuroscience Letters.

[35]  C. Hansel,et al.  Bidirectional Parallel Fiber Plasticity in the Cerebellum under Climbing Fiber Control , 2004, Neuron.

[36]  M. Mauk,et al.  Extinction as new learning versus unlearning: considerations from a computer simulation of the cerebellum. , 2004, Learning & memory.

[37]  J. Churchwell,et al.  Posttraining lesions of the medial prefrontal cortex impair performance of Pavlovian eyeblink conditioning but have no effect on concomitant heart rate changes in rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). , 2001, Behavioral neuroscience.

[38]  R. Clark,et al.  Classical conditioning, awareness, and brain systems , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[39]  J. Bloedel,et al.  The cerebellum and eye-blink conditioning: learning versus network performance hypotheses , 2009, Neuroscience.

[40]  Javier F. Medina,et al.  Computer simulation of cerebellar information processing , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[41]  B. Oswald,et al.  Prefrontal control of trace eyeblink conditioning in rabbits: role in retrieval of the CR? , 2008, Behavioral neuroscience.

[42]  L. Aitkin,et al.  Responses of single units in the pontine nuclei of the cat to acoustic stimulation , 1976, Neuroscience Letters.

[43]  I. Pavlov,et al.  Conditioned reflexes: An investigation of the physiological activity of the cerebral cortex , 2010, Annals of Neurosciences.

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

[45]  S. Lisberger,et al.  Neural Learning Rules for the Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[46]  Wade G. Regehr,et al.  Timing dependence of the induction of cerebellar LTD , 2008, Neuropharmacology.

[47]  J. Disterhoft,et al.  Connections of the caudal anterior cingulate cortex in rabbit: Neural circuitry participating in the acquisition of trace eyeblink conditioning , 2007, Neuroscience.

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

[49]  L. Aitkin,et al.  Acoustic input to the lateral pontine nuclei , 1978, Hearing Research.

[50]  John F. Disterhoft,et al.  Lesions of the Caudal Area of Rabbit Medial Prefrontal Cortex Impair Trace Eyeblink Conditioning , 1998, Neurobiology of Learning and Memory.

[51]  P. Strick,et al.  Basal ganglia and cerebellar loops: motor and cognitive circuits , 2000, Brain Research Reviews.

[52]  S. Kawahara,et al.  Impairment of eyeblink conditioning in GluRδ2‐mutant mice depends on the temporal overlap between conditioned and unconditioned stimuli , 2001, The European journal of neuroscience.

[53]  Yutaka Kirino,et al.  Time-Dependent Reorganization of the Brain Components Underlying Memory Retention in Trace Eyeblink Conditioning , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[54]  Richard F. Thompson,et al.  The role of the cerebellum in classical conditioning of discrete behavioral responses , 2009, Neuroscience.

[55]  Roger Y Tsien,et al.  A new form of cerebellar long-term potentiation is postsynaptic and depends on nitric oxide but not cAMP , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[56]  J. Disterhoft,et al.  Cortical barrel lesions impair whisker-CS trace eyeblink conditioning. , 2007, Learning & memory.

[57]  J J Kim,et al.  Hippocampectomy impairs the memory of recently, but not remotely, acquired trace eyeblink conditioned responses. , 1995, Behavioral neuroscience.

[58]  J. Churchwell,et al.  Medial prefrontal cortex and pavlovian conditioning: trace versus delay conditioning. , 2002, Behavioral neuroscience.

[59]  伊藤 正男.  The cerebellum and neural control , 1984 .

[60]  I. Raman,et al.  Potentiation of Mossy Fiber EPSCs in the Cerebellar Nuclei by NMDA Receptor Activation followed by Postinhibitory Rebound Current , 2006, Neuron.

[61]  M. Mauk,et al.  Stimulus generalization of conditioned eyelid responses produced without cerebellar cortex: implications for plasticity in the cerebellar nuclei. , 2003, Learning & memory.

[62]  P. Goldman-Rakic.  Regional and cellular fractionation of working memory. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[63]  Christof Koch,et al.  Inverse temporal contributions of the dorsal hippocampus and medial prefrontal cortex to the expression of long-term fear memories. , 2008, Learning & memory.

[64]  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.

[65]  S. I. Levin,et al.  Inactivation of sodium channel Scn8A (Na-sub(v)1.6) in Purkinje neurons impairs learning in Morris water maze and delay but not trace eyeblink classical conditioning. , 2006, Behavioral neuroscience.

[66]  J. Disterhoft,et al.  Cortical involvement in acquisition and extinction of trace eyeblink conditioning. , 2000, Behavioral neuroscience.