Lesions of the middle cerebellar peduncle disrupt acquisition and retention of the rabbit's classically conditioned nictitating membrane response.

Rabbits were classically conditioned to emit a nictitating membrane response (NMR) to either a light or tone conditioned stimulus (CS) paired with an eye shock unconditioned stimulus (UCS). They then received lesions of the middle cerebellar peduncle (MCP) or served as unoperated controls. Following surgery, they were given separate presentations of tone, light, and vibratory CSs, each paired with the eye shock UCS. In this way, conditioned responses (CR) to the previously trained light or tone served as a test of retention, whereas CRs to the remaining two conditioned stimuli (tone and vibratory or light and vibratory) served as a test of acquisition. The results of the study revealed that rabbits with complete lesions of the MCP showed disrupted acquisition and retention of the conditioned NMR to all stimuli, rabbits with partial MCP lesions also showed disrupted acquisition and retention to all CSs, but to a lesser degree, and animals with lesions that missed the MCP and unoperated controls both showed normal acquisition and retention of the conditioned NMR. These data are consistent with the view that the cerebellum is an essential part of the circuit for classical conditioning of the NM response and that information about CSs in the auditory, visual, and tactile modalities reach the cerebellum by way of the MCP.

[1]  G. A. Clark,et al.  Effects of ipsilateral rostral pontine reticular lesions on retention of classically conditioned nictitating membrane and eyelid responses , 1981 .

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

[3]  W. R. Salafia,et al.  Classical conditioning Part III: Behavioral, neurophysiological and neurochemical studies in the rabbit , 1987 .

[4]  M Ito,et al.  Neurophysiological aspects of the cerebellar motor control system. , 1970, International journal of neurology.

[5]  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.

[6]  A. Brodal,et al.  Neurological Anatomy in Relation to Clinical Medicine , 1950 .

[7]  Paul R. Solomon,et al.  KIM and the rabbit: The use of the KIM-1 microprocessor to control classical conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response , 1979 .

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

[9]  J. Eccles.  An instruction-selection theory of learning in the cerebellar cortex , 1977, Brain Research.

[10]  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.

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

[12]  J. W. Moore,et al.  Brachium conjuntivum and rubrobulbar tract: Brain stem projections of red nucleus essential for the conditioned nictitating membrane response , 1985, Physiology & Behavior.

[13]  David A. McCormick,et al.  Superior cerebellar peduncle lesions selectively abolish the ipsilateral classically conditioned nictitating membrane/eyelid response of the rabbit , 1982, Brain Research.

[14]  J. W. Moore,et al.  Red nucleus lesions disrupt the classically conditioned nictitating membrane response in rabbits , 1983, Behavioural Brain Research.

[15]  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.

[16]  Joseph B. Sidowski,et al.  Behavior research methods and instrumentation , 1968 .

[17]  JOHN W. Moore,et al.  A brain stem region essential for the classically conditioned but not unconditioned nictitating membrane response , 1982, Physiology & Behavior.

[18]  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.

[19]  F. Plum.  Handbook of Physiology. , 1960 .

[20]  P. Solomon.  Role of the hippocampus in blocking and conditioned inhibition of the rabbit's nictitating membrane response. , 1977, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[21]  J. Falk.  Physiology and Behavior. , 1973 .

[22]  Joseph E. Steinmetz,et al.  Classical conditioning of the rabbit eyelid response with mossy fiber stimulation as the conditioned stimulus , 1985 .

[23]  Richard F. Thompson,et al.  Lesions of the inferior olivary complex cause extinction of the classically conditioned eyeblink response , 1985, Brain Research.

[24]  P. Solomon,et al.  Altered activity in the hippocampus is more detrimental to classical conditioning than removing the structure. , 1983, Science.

[25]  M. Glickstein,et al.  Discrete lesions of the cerebellar cortex abolish the classically conditioned nictitating membrane response of the rabbit , 1984, Behavioural Brain Research.