Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Links Between Single-Trial Changes and Learning Rate in Eyelid Conditioning

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
The Cerebellum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The discovery of single-trial learning effects, where the presence or absence (or the number) of climbing fiber inputs produces measureable changes in Purkinje cell response and in behavior, represents a major breakthrough in cerebellar learning. Among other things, these observations provide strong links between climbing fiber-mediated plasticity and cerebellar learning. They also demonstrate that cerebellar learning is stochastic, with each instantiation of a movement producing a small increment or decrement in gain. The sum of the small changes give rise to the macroscopic properties of cerebellar learning. We used a relatively large data set from another example of cerebellar-dependent learning, classical conditioning of eyelid responses, to attempt a behavioral replication and extension of single-trial learning effects. As a normal part of training, stimulus-alone trials provide instances where the climbing fiber response would be omitted, similar to non-climbing-fiber trials (gain down) during smooth pursuit training. The consequences of the stimulus-alone trial on the amplitude and timing of the conditioned response on the following paired trials were examined. We find that the amplitude of the conditioned response during the trial after a stimulus-alone trial (no climbing fiber input) was measurably smaller than the amplitude on the previous trials, and this single-trial effect on amplitude is larger for longer interstimulus intervals. The magnitude of the single-trial effect parallels the rate of extinction at different interstimulus intervals supporting the previously observed link between single-trial effects and learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Medina JF, Lisberger SG. Links from complex spikes to local plasticity and motor learning in the cerebellum of awake-behaving monkeys. Nat Neurosci. 2008;11:1185–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Yang Y, Lisberger SG. Purkinje-cell plasticity and cerebellar motor learning are graded by complex-spike duration. Nature. 2014;510:529–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Mauk MD, Steinmtez JE, Thompson RF. Classical conditioning using stimulation of the inferior olive as the unconditioned stimulus. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 1986;83:5349–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Steinmetz JE, Lavond DG, Thompson RF. Classical conditioning in rabbits using oointine nucleus stimulation as a conditioned stimulus and inferior olive stimulation as a n unconditioned stimulus. Synapse. 1989;3:225–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. McCormick DA, Thompson RF. Neuronal responses of the rabbit cerebellum during acquisition and performance of a classically conditioned nictitating membrane-eyelid response. J Neurosci. 1984;4:2811–22.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gould TJ, Steinmetz JE. Changes in rabbit cerebellar cortical and interpositus nucleus activity during acquisition, extinction, and backward classical eyelid conditioning. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 1996;65:17–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Halverson HE, Lee I, Freeman JH. Associative plasticity in the medial auditory thalamus and cerebellar interpositus nucleus during eyeblink conditioning. J Neurosci. 2010;30:8787–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Svensson P, Ivarsson M, Hesslow G. Effect of varying the intensity and train frequency of forelimb and cerebellar mossy fiber conditioned stimuli on the latency of conditioned eye-blink responses in decerebrate ferrets. Learn Mem. 1997;4:105–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kalmbach BE, Ohyama T, Mauk MD. Temporal patterns of inputs to cerebellum necessary and sufficient for trace eyelid conditioning. J Neurophysiol. 2010;104:627–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Schneiderman N, Fuentes I, Gormezano I. Acquisition and extinction of the classically conditioned eyelid response in the albino rabbit. Science. 1962;136:650–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sears LL, Steinmetz JE. Dorsal accessory inferior olive activity diminishes during acquisition of the rabbit classically conditioned eyelid response. Brain Res. 1991;545:114–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hesslow G, Ivarsson M. Inhibition of the inferior olive during conditioned responses in the decerebrate ferret. Exp Brain Res. 1996;110:36–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Medina JF, Nores WL, Mauk MD. Inhibition of climbing fibres is a signal for the extinction of conditioned eyelid responses. Nature. 2002;416:330–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ryan SB, Detwiler KL, Holland KH, Hord MA, Bracha V. A long-range, wide field-of-view infrared eyeblink detector. J Neurosci Methods. 2006;15:74–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kreider JC, Mauk MD. Eyelid conditioning to a target amplitude: adding how much to whether and when. J Neurosci. 2010;30:14145–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Ohyama T, Voicu H, Kalmbach B, Mauk MD. A decrementing form of plasticity apparent in cerebellar learning. J Neurosci. 2010;30:16993–7003.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Mauk MD, Donegan NH. A model of Pavlovian eyelid conditioning based on the synaptic organization of the cerebellum. Learn Mem. 1997;4:130–58.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by NIH grants MH74006 and MH46904.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael D. Mauk.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khilkevich, A., Halverson, H.E., Canton-Josh, J.E. et al. Links Between Single-Trial Changes and Learning Rate in Eyelid Conditioning. Cerebellum 15, 112–121 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12311-015-0690-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12311-015-0690-8

Keywords

Navigation