Literature DB >> 24816533

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

David J Herzfeld1, Damien Pastor2, Adrian M Haith1, Yves Rossetti3, Reza Shadmehr1, Jacinta O'Shea4.   

Abstract

We investigated the contributions of the cerebellum and the motor cortex (M1) to acquisition and retention of human motor memories in a force field reaching task. We found that anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the cerebellum, a technique that is thought to increase neuronal excitability, increased the ability to learn from error and form an internal model of the field, while cathodal cerebellar stimulation reduced this error-dependent learning. In addition, cathodal cerebellar stimulation disrupted the ability to respond to error within a reaching movement, reducing the gain of the sensory-motor feedback loop. By contrast, anodal M1 stimulation had no significant effects on these variables. During sham stimulation, early in training the acquired motor memory exhibited rapid decay in error-clamp trials. With further training the rate of decay decreased, suggesting that with training the motor memory was transformed from a labile to a more stable state. Surprisingly, neither cerebellar nor M1 stimulation altered these decay patterns. Participants returned 24hours later and were re-tested in error-clamp trials without stimulation. The cerebellar group that had learned the task with cathodal stimulation exhibited significantly impaired retention, and retention was not improved by M1 anodal stimulation. In summary, non-invasive cerebellar stimulation resulted in polarity-dependent up- or down-regulation of error-dependent motor learning. In addition, cathodal cerebellar stimulation during acquisition impaired the ability to retain the motor memory overnight. Thus, in the force field task we found a critical role for the cerebellum in both formation of motor memory and its retention.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adaptation; Consolidation; Force field; Generalization; Motor control; Reaching; Retention; tDCS

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24816533      PMCID: PMC4099269          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.04.076

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimage        ISSN: 1053-8119            Impact factor:   6.556


  61 in total

1.  Consolidation of dynamic motor learning is not disrupted by rTMS of primary motor cortex.

Authors:  Pierre Baraduc; Nicolas Lang; John C Rothwell; Daniel M Wolpert
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2004-02-03       Impact factor: 10.834

2.  Neuronal correlates of memory formation in motor cortex after adaptation to force field.

Authors:  Fritzie Arce; Itai Novick; Yael Mandelblat-Cerf; Eilon Vaadia
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-07-07       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation impairs the practice-dependent proficiency increase in working memory.

Authors:  R Ferrucci; S Marceglia; M Vergari; F Cogiamanian; S Mrakic-Sposta; F Mameli; S Zago; S Barbieri; A Priori
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Noninvasive cortical stimulation enhances motor skill acquisition over multiple days through an effect on consolidation.

Authors:  Janine Reis; Heidi M Schambra; Leonardo G Cohen; Ethan R Buch; Brita Fritsch; Eric Zarahn; Pablo A Celnik; John W Krakauer
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-01-21       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Purkinje cell activity during motor learning.

Authors:  P F Gilbert; W T Thach
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1977-06-10       Impact factor: 3.252

6.  Long-term retention explained by a model of short-term learning in the adaptive control of reaching.

Authors:  Wilsaan M Joiner; Maurice A Smith
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  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

8.  Role of cerebellar cortical protein synthesis in transfer of memory trace of cerebellum-dependent motor learning.

Authors:  Takehito Okamoto; Shogo Endo; Tomoaki Shirao; Soichi Nagao
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Modulation of cerebellar excitability by polarity-specific noninvasive direct current stimulation.

Authors:  Joseph M Galea; Gowri Jayaram; Loni Ajagbe; Pablo Celnik
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2009-07-15       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Enhanced locomotor adaptation aftereffect in the "broken escalator" phenomenon using anodal tDCS.

Authors:  D Kaski; S Quadir; M Patel; N Yousif; A M Bronstein
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-02-08       Impact factor: 2.714

View more
  80 in total

1.  Modulation of error-sensitivity during a prism adaptation task in people with cerebellar degeneration.

Authors:  Ritsuko Hanajima; Reza Shadmehr; Shinya Ohminami; Ryosuke Tsutsumi; Yuichiro Shirota; Takahiro Shimizu; Nobuyuki Tanaka; Yasuo Terao; Shoji Tsuji; Yoshikazu Ugawa; Motoaki Uchimura; Masato Inoue; Shigeru Kitazawa
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-08-26       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Brain-computer interface: current and emerging rehabilitation applications.

Authors:  Janis J Daly; Jane E Huggins
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.966

3.  Individual differences in TMS sensitivity influence the efficacy of tDCS in facilitating sensorimotor adaptation.

Authors:  L Labruna; A Stark-Inbar; A Breska; M Dabit; B Vanderschelden; M A Nitsche; R B Ivry
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2019-03-13       Impact factor: 8.955

4.  Cerebellar direct current stimulation enhances on-line motor skill acquisition through an effect on accuracy.

Authors:  Gabriela Cantarero; Danny Spampinato; Janine Reis; Loni Ajagbe; Tziporah Thompson; Kopal Kulkarni; Pablo Celnik
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-02-18       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (ctDCS) Impairs Balance Control in Healthy Individuals.

Authors:  Águida Foerster; Lorena Melo; Marina Mello; Rebeca Castro; Lívia Shirahige; Sérgio Rocha; Kátia Monte-Silva
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.847

6.  Impaired visuomotor generalization by inconsistent attentional contexts.

Authors:  Tony S L Wang; Joo-Hyun Song
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Taking the brakes off the learning curve.

Authors:  Freja Gheysen; Gabriel Lasne; Mélanie Pélégrini-Issac; Genevieve Albouy; Sabine Meunier; Habib Benali; Julien Doyon; Traian Popa
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2016-12-23       Impact factor: 5.038

8.  Consolidation of visuomotor adaptation memory with consistent and noisy environments.

Authors:  Rodrigo S Maeda; Steven E McGee; Daniel S Marigold
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-10-26       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 9.  Targeting the Cerebellum by Noninvasive Neurostimulation: a Review.

Authors:  Kim van Dun; Florian Bodranghien; Mario Manto; Peter Mariën
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 3.847

10.  Learning to Predict and Control the Physics of Our Movements.

Authors:  Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2017-02-15       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.