Associative learning in the cerebellum underlies motor memories and probably also cognitive associations. Pavlovian eyeblink conditioning, a widely used experimental model of such learning, depends on the cerebellum, but the memory locus within the cerebellum as well as the underlying mechanisms have remained controversial. To date, crucial information on how cerebellar Purkinje cells change their activity during learning has been ambiguous and contradictory, and there is no information at all about how they behave during extinction and reacquisition. We have now tracked the activity of single Purkinje cells with microelectrodes for up to 16 h in decerebrate ferrets during learning, extinction, and relearning. We demonstrate that paired peripheral forelimb and periocular stimulation, as well as paired direct stimulation of cerebellar afferent pathways (mossy and climbing fibers) consistently causes a gradual acquisition of an inhibitory response in Purkinje cell simple spike firing. This conditioned cell response has several properties that matches known features of the behavioral conditioned response. The response latency varies with the interstimulus interval, and the response maximum is adaptively timed to precede the unconditioned stimulus. Across training trials, it matches behavioral extinction to unpaired stimulation and also the substantial savings that occur when paired stimulation is reinstated. These data suggest that many of the basic behavioral phenomena in eyeblink conditioning can be explained at the level of the single Purkinje cell.
Synaptic gain control and information storage in neural networks are mediated by alterations in synaptic transmission, such as in long-term potentiation (LTP). Here, we show using both in vitro and in vivo recordings from the rat cerebellum that tetanization protocols for the induction of LTP at parallel fiber (PF)-to-Purkinje cell synapses can also evoke increases in intrinsic excitability. This form of intrinsic plasticity shares with LTP a requirement for the activation of protein phosphatases 1, 2A, and 2B for induction. Purkinje cell intrinsic plasticity resembles CA1 hippocampal pyramidal cell intrinsic plasticity in that it requires activity of protein kinase A (PKA) and casein kinase 2 (CK2) and is mediated by a downregulation of SK-type calcium-sensitive K conductances. In addition, Purkinje cell intrinsic plasticity similarly results in enhanced spine calcium signaling. However, there are fundamental differences: first, while in the hippocampus increases in excitability result in a higher probability for LTP induction, intrinsic plasticity in Purkinje cells lowers the probability for subsequent LTP induction. Second, intrinsic plasticity raises the spontaneous spike frequency of Purkinje cells. The latter effect does not impair tonic spike firing in the target neurons of inhibitory Purkinje cell projections in the deep cerebellar nuclei, but lowers the Purkinje cell signal-to-noise ratio, thus reducing the PF readout. These observations suggest that intrinsic plasticity accompanies LTP of active PF synapses, while it reduces at weaker, nonpotentiated synapses the probability for subsequent potentiation and lowers the impact on the Purkinje cell output.
Neuronal function depends on the properties of the synaptic inputs the neuron receive and on its intrinsic responsive properties. However, the conditions for synaptic integration and activation of intrinsic responses may to a large extent depend on the level of background synaptic input. In this respect, the deep cerebellar nuclear (DCN) neurons are of particular interest: they feature a massive background synaptic input and an intrinsic, postinhibitory rebound depolarization with profound effects on the synaptic integration. Using in vivo whole cell patch clamp recordings from DCN cells in the cat, we find that the background of Purkinje cell input provides a tonic inhibitory synaptic noise in the DCN cell. Under these conditions, individual Purkinje cells appear to have a near negligible influence on the DCN cell and clear-cut rebounds are difficult to induce. Peripheral input that drives the simple spike output of the afferent PCs to the DCN cell generates a relatively strong DCN cell inhibition, but do not induce rebounds. In contrast, synchronized climbing fiber activation, which leads to a synchronized input from a large number of Purkinje cells, can induce profound rebound responses. In light of what is known about climbing fiber activation under behaviour, the present findings suggest that DCN cell rebound responses may be an unusual event. Our results also suggest that cortical modulation of DCN cell output require a substantial co-modulation of a large proportion of the PCs that innervate the cell, which is a possible rationale for the existence of the cerebellar microcomplex.
The compartmentalization of the cerebellum into modules is often used to discuss its function. What, exactly, can be considered a module, how do they operate, can they be subdivided and do they act individually or in concert are only some of the key questions discussed in this consensus paper. Experts studying cerebellar compartmentalization give their insights on the structure and function of cerebellar modules, with the aim of providing an up-to-date review of the extensive literature on this subject. Starting with an historical perspective indicating that the basis of the modular organization is formed by matching olivocorticonuclear connectivity, this is followed by consideration of anatomical and chemical modular boundaries, revealing a relation between anatomical, chemical, and physiological borders. In addition, the question is asked what the smallest operational unit of the cerebellum might be. Furthermore, it has become clear that chemical diversity of Purkinje cells also results in diversity of information processing between cerebellar modules. An additional important consideration is the relation between modular compartmentalization and the organization of the mossy fiber system, resulting in the concept of modular plasticity. Finally, examination of cerebellar output patterns suggesting cooperation between modules and recent work on modular aspects of emotional behavior are discussed. Despite the general consensus that the cerebellum has a modular organization, many questions remain. The authors hope that this joint review will inspire future cerebellar research so that we are better able to understand how this brain structure makes its vital contribution to behavior in its most general form.
The computational principles underlying the processing of sensoryevoked synaptic inputs are understood only rudimentarily. A critical missing factor is knowledge of the activation patterns of the synaptic inputs to the processing neurons. Here we use welldefined, reproducible skin stimulation to describe the specific signal transformations that occur in different parallel mossy fiber pathways and analyze their representation in the synaptic inputs to cerebellar granule cells. We find that mossy fiber input codes are preserved in the synaptic responses of granule cells, suggesting a coding-specific innervation. The computational consequences of this are that it becomes possible for granule cells to also transmit weak sensory inputs in a graded fashion and to preserve the specific activity patterns of the mossy fibers.cerebellum ͉ cuneate ͉ lateral reticular nucleus F irst-order processing of sensory inputs within the mammalian brain occurs within the spinal cord, brainstem nuclei, and thalamus, as well as in the input layers of specific parts of the cerebral and cerebellar cortices. For example, skin sensory input destined for the cerebellar granule layer can be preprocessed through either the cuneate nucleus pathway (1) or the spinal cord-lateral reticular nucleus (LRN) pathways (2) before being processed further by the granule cells. In the cuneate nucleus, neurons process raw primary afferent input mediated directly from skin receptors, and a set of rather intricate connectivity patterns ensures that the information conveyed through the cuneate neurons represent a synthesized receptive field that have sharp borders (3, 4). Thus, it may be speculated that the purpose of the preprocessing is to present the input layers with sensory information in a form that can be more readily used by downstream neurons, eliminating properties of the skin sensory sheet that are not relevant to the central processing. In contrast, the LRN, another important precerebellar source, receives skin sensory input through neurons of the spinal cord that are involved in the mediation of descending motor commands (5, 6). Although both the cuneate and the LRN are strongly influenced by skin input, they are likely to code the same skin input in different ways because of their differences in convergent synaptic inputs and intrinsic cellular properties.The understanding of the function of the input layers is more limited, but at least for the cerebellar granule cells, various contrasting theories have been proposed (7-9). Cerebellar granule cells have attracted considerable interest because of their relative simplicity; they receive only about 4 mossy fiber synaptic inputs, each of which evokes strong postsynaptic responses (7, 10). Therefore, actually determining the precise role of each individual synapse in neuronal information processing is feasible, if intracellular recordings and a description of the natural activation patterns in vivo of each synaptic input can be obtained. Here we approach this aim by identifying the specific coding o...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.