To study the role of the basal ganglia in learning of sequential movements, we trained two monkeys to perform a sequential button-press task (2x5 task). This task enabled us to examine the process of learning new sequences as well as the execution of well-learned sequences repeatedly. We injected muscimol (a GABA agonist) into different parts of the striatum to inactivate the local neural activity reversibly. The learning of new sequences became deficient after injections in the anterior caudate and putamen, but not the middle-posterior putamen. The execution of well-learned sequences was disrupted after injections in the middle-posterior putamen and, less severely, after injections in the anterior caudate/putamen. These results suggest that the anterior and posterior portions of the striatum participate in different aspects of learning of sequential movements.

1. To characterize procedural learning and memory, we devised a behavioral paradigm that allows us to examine the process of learning of new procedures, repeatedly and without serious difficulties for primate subjects. We trained two monkeys to perform a sequential button press task. Upon pressing of a home key, 2 of 16 (4 x 4 matrix) light-emitting diode (LED) buttons (called "set") were illuminated simultaneously, and the monkey had to press them in a predetermined order that he had to find out by trial-and-error. A total of five sets (called "hyperset") was presented in a fixed order for completion of a trial; an error at any set aborted the trial. A given hyperset was repeated as a block of experiment until 20 successful trials were performed. Monkeys PI and BO experienced 313 and 92 hypersets, respectively. Most of these hypersets were experienced only once (1 block of experiment); the others (28 hypersets for monkey PI and 14 hypersets for monkey BO) were chosen for extensive practice. 2. The learning, indicated as the decrease in the number of trials to criterion and the decrease in the performance time, proceeded at three levels: 1) short-term and sequence-selective learning that occurred by repeating a particular hyperset during a block of experiment; our monkeys learned, to some degree, to perform a new hyperset within a short period (< 5 min); 2) long-term and sequence-selective learning that took place for each hyperset across days; by daily practice, they further improved their skills for performing the particular hyperset; and 3) long-term and sequence-unselective learning that was indicated by the improvement of performance for new hypersets; the monkeys were required to learn many hypersets, each just once (a block of trials), in which they performed gradually better with more experiences in the 2 x 5 task. 3. To examine whether the memory was retained for a long period, we had the monkey learn 12 hypersets sufficiently, then we stopped the training and retested them after 1 or 6 mo. After the 1-mo interruption the performance was significantly better than that for new hypersets. After the 6-mo interruption the performance was not different from new hypersets in terms of the number of trials but was significantly better than new hypersets in terms of the performance time. The results suggest that motor memory (measured by performance time) can be retained longer than procedural memory (measured by the number of trials).

No abstract

The purpose of this study was to characterize the nature and structure of procedural memory. We have previously studied the process of learning sequential behavioral procedures using monkeys. The monkeys task was to press five consecutive pairs of buttons (indicated by illumination) in the correct order for every pair, which he had to find by trial-and-error in a block of trials. The whole sequence was called a ªhypersetº; each pair was called a ªsetº. We first examined whether monkeys learned to perform a hyperset as a single sequence or learned the order of button-presses individually for each set. To answer this question, we generated hypersets that were the same as the hypersets that had been extensively learned except that the order of the sets was reversed. The performance of these ªreversed hypersetsº was much worse than the performance of the original learned hypersets and was similar to the performance of new hypersets, as regards both the number of errors and the performance time. The result suggests that monkeys learned a hyperset as a sequence. To examine whether the learned performance was specific to the hand used for practice, we had monkeys use the same hand throughout the long-term practice of each hyperset, and then tested the opposite hand. The performance using the opposite hand was worse than the performance using the trained hand, but was better than the performance for new hypersets. This indicates that the memory for the sequential procedure is only partially accessible to the hand that was not used for the practice.

1. In a preceding paper we examined the short-term and long-term processes of learning of sequential procedures in monkeys. We now report that the pattern of eye movements changed along with the long-term learning. 2. The monkey's task was to press five consecutive pairs of target buttons (indicated by illumination) in the correct order for every pair, which the monkey had to find by trial and error (2 x 5 task). The whole sequence was called the "hyperset"; each pair was called the "set." 3. Initially, the saccade toward the correct target occurred after illumination of the targets (visually guided saccade). After sufficient learning, the saccade tended to occur before the target illumination (anticipatory saccade). This was true only for the hyperset that had been learned. 4. The likelihood of anticipatory saccade increased gradually over 20-30 days of practice of the particular hyperset. The time course was similar to how the hand learned (button press latency). 5. The monkeys were required to use the same hand for each hyperset throughout learning, except when we asked them to use the opposite hand. The nearly perfect performance due to the extensive practice was then deteriorated by the use of the opposite hand. We found, in addition, that anticipatory saccades became much less frequent. This finding suggests that critical for the skilled performance was the combination of the eyes and the side of the hand that was used for the practice of a given sequence.