| Literature DB >> 24784584 |
Hiroko Kotajima1, Kazuhisa Sakai, Tsutomu Hashikawa, Dai Yanagihara.
Abstract
The inferior olive (IO) sends excitatory inputs to the cerebellar cortex and cerebellar nuclei through the climbing fibers. In eyeblink conditioning, a model of motor learning, the inactivation of or a lesion in the IO impairs the acquisition or expression of conditioned eyeblink responses. Additionally, climbing fibers originating from the IO are believed to transmit the unconditioned stimulus to the cerebellum in eyeblink conditioning. Studies using fear-conditioned bradycardia showed that the cerebellum is associated with adaptive control of heart rate. However, the role of inputs from the IO to the cerebellum in fear-conditioned bradycardia has not yet been investigated. To examine this possible role, we tested fear-conditioned bradycardia in mice by selective disruption of the IO using 3-acetylpyridine. In a rotarod test, mice with an IO lesion were unable to remain on the rod. The number of neurons of IO nuclei in these mice was decreased to ∼40% compared with control mice. Mice with an IO lesion did not show changes in the mean heart rate or in heart rate responses to a conditioned stimulus, or in their responses to a painful stimulus in a tail-flick test. However, they did show impairment of the acquisition/expression of conditioned bradycardia and attenuation of heart rate responses to a pain stimulus used as an unconditioned stimulus. These results indicate that the IO inputs to the cerebellum play a key role in the acquisition/expression of conditioned bradycardia.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24784584 PMCID: PMC4004639 DOI: 10.1097/WNR.0000000000000135
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neuroreport ISSN: 0959-4965 Impact factor: 1.837
Fig. 1The effect of 3-acetylpyridine administration. Coronal sections of −3.08 mm from the interaural were stained with cresyl violet. (a) Control mice (n=3); (b) inferior olive (IO) mice (n=3). Scale bar=200 μm. (c) Number of IO cells in control and IO mice. Error bars show SEM. ***P<0.001.
Fig. 2Rotarod test of control (open circles) and inferior olive (IO) mice (closed circles). The performance of each mouse was limited to a maximum retention time of 120 s/trial. IO mice showed poor performance compared with the control mice. Error bars show SEM.
Fig. 3Effects of the inferior olive (IO) lesion on the mean heart rate, heart rate responses to the conditioned stimulus (CS), and acquisition/expression of conditioned bradycardia. (a) Bars show mean baseline heart rates on the second day of habituation in control (open bar) and IO mice (filled bar). (b) Mean changes in heart rate (beats/min) during 1-s intervals of the 5-s CS averaged from 50 trials on the second day of CS-alone testing in control (open circles) and IO mice (closed circles). The horizontal line indicates the mean heart rate before the 5-s CS averaged from 50 trials. (c) IO mice had impaired acquisition/expression of conditioned bradycardia. Mean heart rate changes from the pre-CS baseline during the 5-s CS averaged from 50 trials on the first day of the CS-unconditioned stimulus phase. Error bars show SEM.
Fig. 4Heart rate responses to an electrical tail shock given as an unconditioned stimulus (US) and responses to a pain stimulus in a tail-flick test. (a) Topography of the heart rate responses following application of the electrical tail shock in the US-alone phase. Mean changes in heart rate (beats/min) during each 1-s interval of the 6 s following the offset of the US averaged from 20 trials. Inferior olive (IO) mice show an attenuated tachycardiac response to the tail shock. (b) Tail-flick test. Both control and IO mice received two different thermal stimuli (80 and 110°C). Error bars show SEM.