Cerebellar cortex contributions to the expression and timing of conditioned eyelid responses.

We used micro-infusions during eyelid conditioning in rabbits to investigate the relative contributions of cerebellar cortex and the underlying deep nuclei (DCN) to the expression of cerebellar learning. These tests were conducted using two forms of cerebellum-dependent eyelid conditioning for which the relative roles of cerebellar cortex and DCN are controversial: delay conditioning, which is largely unaffected by forebrain lesions, and trace conditioning, which involves interactions between forebrain and cerebellum. For rabbits trained with delay conditioning, silencing cerebellar cortex by micro-infusions of the local anesthetic lidocaine unmasked stereotyped short-latency responses. This was also the case after extinction as observed previously with reversible blockade of cerebellar cortex output. Conversely, increasing cerebellar cortex activity by micro-infusions of the GABA(A) antagonist picrotoxin reversibly abolished conditioned responses. Effective cannula placements were clustered around the primary fissure and deeper in lobules hemispheric lobule IV (HIV) and hemispheric lobule V (HV) of anterior lobe. In well-trained trace conditioned rabbits, silencing this same area of cerebellar cortex or reversibly blocking cerebellar cortex output also unmasked short-latency responses. Because Purkinje cells are the sole output of cerebellar cortex, these results provide evidence that the expression of well-timed conditioned responses requires a well-timed decrease in the activity of Purkinje cells in anterior lobe. The parallels between results from delay and trace conditioning suggest similar contributions of plasticity in cerebellar cortex and DCN in both instances.

Learning in the cerebellar nucleus is necessary for acquisition of Pavlovian eyelid conditioning

The cumulative work presented here supports the hypothesis that plasticity in the cerebellar cortex and cerebellar nuclei mediates a simple associative form of motor teaming-Pavlovian eyelid conditioning. It was previously demonstrated that focal ablative lesions of cerebellar anterior lobe or pharmacological block of the cerebellar cortex output disrupted the timing of the conditioned eyeblink response, unmasking a response with a relatively fixed and very short latency to onset. The results of this thesis demonstrate that the short-latency responses are due to associative learning. Unpaired training does not support the acquisition of short-latency responses while the rate of acquisition of short-latency responses during paired training is approximately the same as that of timed conditioned responses. The acquisition of short-latency responses is dependent on an intact cerebellar cortex. Both ablative lesions of the cerebellar cortex and inactivation of cerebellar cortex output with picrotoxin block the acquisition of short-latency responses. However, once the short-latency responses are acquired neither disconnection of cerebellar cortex nor inactivation of the cerebellar nucleus block reacquisition. The results are consistent with the proposal that plasticity in the cerebellar cortex is necessary for learning the timing of conditioned responses, plasticity in the interpositus nucleus mediates the short latency responses, and cerebellar cortical output and mossy fiber input are necessary for the acquisition of short latency responses. ^