Literature DB >> 20164398

Size of error affects cerebellar contributions to motor learning.

Sarah E Criscimagna-Hemminger1, Amy J Bastian, Reza Shadmehr.   

Abstract

Small errors may affect the process of learning in a fundamentally different way than large errors. For example, adapting reaching movements in response to a small perturbation produces generalization patterns that are different from large perturbations. Are distinct neural mechanisms engaged in response to large versus small errors? Here, we examined the motor learning process in patients with severe degeneration of the cerebellum. Consistent with earlier reports, we found that the patients were profoundly impaired in adapting their motor commands during reaching movements in response to large, sudden perturbations. However, when the same magnitude perturbation was imposed gradually over many trials, the patients showed marked improvements, uncovering a latent ability to learn from errors. On sudden removal of the perturbation, the patients exhibited aftereffects that persisted much longer than did those in healthy controls. That is, despite cerebellar damage, the brain maintained the ability to learn from small errors and the motor memory that resulted from this learning was strongly resistant to change. Of note was the fact that on completion of learning, the motor output of the cerebellar patients remained distinct from healthy controls in terms of its temporal characteristics. Therefore cerebellar degeneration impaired the ability to learn from large-magnitude errors, but had a lesser impact on learning from small errors. The neural basis of motor learning in response to small and large errors appears to be distinct.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20164398      PMCID: PMC2853280          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00822.2009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  37 in total

1.  Incremental training increases the plasticity of the auditory space map in adult barn owls.

Authors:  Brie A Linkenhoker; Eric I Knudsen
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-09-19       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Is interlimb transfer of force-field adaptation a cognitive response to the sudden introduction of load?

Authors:  Nicole Malfait; David J Ostry
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2004-09-15       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Dexterity in cerebellar agenesis.

Authors:  Dennis A Nowak; Dagmar Timmann; Joachim Hermsdörfer
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2006-09-18       Impact factor: 3.139

4.  Two waves of a long-lasting aftereffect of prism adaptation measured over 7 days.

Authors:  Y Hatada; R C Miall; Y Rossetti
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-11-18       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Cerebellar contributions to locomotor adaptations during splitbelt treadmill walking.

Authors:  Susanne M Morton; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-09-06       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Motor adaptation as a process of reoptimization.

Authors:  Jun Izawa; Tushar Rane; Opher Donchin; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2008-03-12       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Persistence of motor memories reflects statistics of the learning event.

Authors:  Vincent S Huang; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-06-03       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Reach adaptation: what determines whether we learn an internal model of the tool or adapt the model of our arm?

Authors:  JoAnn Kluzik; Jörn Diedrichsen; Reza Shadmehr; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-07-02       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Throwing while looking through prisms. I. Focal olivocerebellar lesions impair adaptation.

Authors:  T A Martin; J G Keating; H P Goodkin; A J Bastian; W T Thach
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 13.501

10.  Cerebellar contributions to adaptive control of saccades in humans.

Authors:  Minnan Xu-Wilson; Haiyin Chen-Harris; David S Zee; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 6.167

View more
  125 in total

Review 1.  Are we ready for a natural history of motor learning?

Authors:  Lior Shmuelof; John W Krakauer
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2011-11-03       Impact factor: 17.173

2.  Proprioceptive recalibration in the right and left hands following abrupt visuomotor adaptation.

Authors:  Danielle Salomonczyk; Denise Y P Henriques; Erin K Cressman
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-12-24       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Adaptation to sensory-motor reflex perturbations is blind to the source of errors.

Authors:  Todd E Hudson; Michael S Landy
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2012-01-06       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  How is a motor skill learned? Change and invariance at the levels of task success and trajectory control.

Authors:  Lior Shmuelof; John W Krakauer; Pietro Mazzoni
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  How does the motor system correct for errors in time and space during locomotor adaptation?

Authors:  Laura A Malone; Amy J Bastian; Gelsy Torres-Oviedo
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Substituting auditory for visual feedback to adapt to altered dynamic and kinematic environments during reaching.

Authors:  Fabio Oscari; Riccardo Secoli; Federico Avanzini; Giulio Rosati; David J Reinkensmeyer
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-06-26       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Contributions of the motor cortex to adaptive control of reaching depend on the perturbation schedule.

Authors:  Jean-Jacques Orban de Xivry; Sarah E Criscimagna-Hemminger; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2010-12-03       Impact factor: 5.357

8.  Learning on multiple timescales in smooth pursuit eye movements.

Authors:  Yan Yang; Stephen G Lisberger
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-09-08       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Predicting and correcting ataxia using a model of cerebellar function.

Authors:  Nasir H Bhanpuri; Allison M Okamura; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2014-05-08       Impact factor: 13.501

10.  Contributions of the cerebellum and the motor cortex to acquisition and retention of motor memories.

Authors:  David J Herzfeld; Damien Pastor; Adrian M Haith; Yves Rossetti; Reza Shadmehr; Jacinta O'Shea
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 6.556

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.