The cerebellum exhibits both motor and reward-related signals. However, it remains unclear whether reward is processed independently from the motor command or might reflect the motor consequences of the reward drive. To test how reward-related signals interact with sensorimotor processing in the cerebellum, we recorded Purkinje cell simple spike activity in the cerebellar floccular complex while monkeys were engaged in smooth pursuit eye movement tasks. The color of the target signaled the size of the reward the monkeys would receive at the end of the target motion. When the tracking task presented a single target, both pursuit and neural activity were only slightly modulated by the reward size. The reward modulations in single cells were rarely large enough to be detected. These modulations were only significant in the population analysis when we averaged across many neurons. In two-target tasks where the monkey learned to select based on the size of the reward outcome, both behavior and neural activity adapted rapidly. In both the single- and two-target tasks, the size of the reward-related modulation matched the size of the effect of reward on behavior. Thus, unlike cortical activity in eye movement structures, the reward-related signals could not be dissociated from the motor command. These results suggest that reward information is integrated with the eye movement command upstream of the Purkinje cells in the floccular complex. Thus reward-related modulations of the simple spikes are akin to modulations found in motor behavior and not to the central processing of the reward value. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Disentangling sensorimotor and reward signals is only possible if these signals do not completely overlap. We recorded activity in the floccular complex of the cerebellum while monkeys performed tasks designed to separate representations of reward from those of movement. Activity modulation by reward could be accounted for by the coding of eye movement parameters, suggesting that reward information is already integrated into motor commands upstream of the floccular complex.

When animal behavior is studied in a laboratory environment, the animals are often extensively trained to shape their behavior. A crucial question is whether the behavior observed after training is part of the natural repertoire of the animal or represents an outlier in the animal’s natural capabilities. This can be investigated by assessing the extent to which the target behavior is manifested during the initial stages of training and the time course of learning. We explored this issue by examining smooth pursuit eye movements in monkeys naïve to smooth pursuit tasks. We recorded the eye movements of monkeys from the 1st days of training on a step-ramp paradigm. We used bright spots, monkey pictures and scrambled versions of the pictures as moving targets. We found that during the initial stages of training, the pursuit initiation was largest for the monkey pictures and in some direction conditions close to target velocity. When the pursuit initiation was large, the monkeys mostly continued to track the target with smooth pursuit movements while correcting for displacement errors with small saccades. Two weeks of training increased the pursuit eye velocity in all stimulus conditions, whereas further extensive training enhanced pursuit slightly more. The training decreased the coefficient of variation of the eye velocity. Anisotropies that grade pursuit across directions were observed from the 1st day of training and mostly persisted across training. Thus, smooth pursuit in the step-ramp paradigm appears to be part of the natural repertoire of monkeys’ behavior and training adjusts monkeys’ natural predisposed behavior.

Motor adaptation is commonly thought to be a trial-and-error process in which the accuracy of movement improves with repetition of behavior. We challenged this view by testing whether erroneous movements are necessary for motor adaptation. In the eye movement system, the association between movements and errors can be disentangled, since errors in the predicted stimulus trajectory can be perceived even without movements. We modified a smooth pursuit eye movement adaptation paradigm in which monkeys learn to make an eye movement that predicts an upcoming change in target direction. We trained the monkeys to fixate on a target while covertly, an additional target initially moved in one direction and then changed direction after 250 ms. The monkeys showed a learned response to infrequent probe trials in which they were instructed to follow the moving target. Further experiments confirmed that probing learning or residual eye movements during fixation did not drive learning. These results show that motor adaptation can be elicited in the absence of movement and provide an animal model for studying the implementation of passive motor learning. Current models assume that the interaction between movement and error signals underlies adaptive motor learning. Our results point to other mechanisms that may drive learning in the absence of movement. Significance statement What are the signals that drive learning? Many experimental and theoretical studies have approached this question from the perspective of motor adaptation as it is both extremely relevant to everyday life and allows for tight experimental control. Motor adaptation is thought to be a gradual process in which errors in behavior are corrected. Here we challenged this view and developed a behavioral paradigm for studying whether movement is necessary for motor adaptation. We found that motor adaptive learning can be elicited in the absence of movement, thus suggesting that motor adaptation has a crucial passive component.