Comparison of Single Unit Responses to Tone, Light, and Compound Conditioned Stimuli during Rabbit Classical Eyeblink Conditioning

Author： Tracy J.A. Britton G.B. Steinmetz J.E.

Publisher： Academic Press

ISSN： 1074-7427

Source： Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, Vol.76, Iss.3, 2001-11, pp. : 253-267

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

Unit recordings and lesion studies have implicated the cerebellum as an essential site for the acquisition and maintenance of the conditioned eyeblink response. The current study looked at the neural characteristics of conditioned stimulus (CS) processing in the interpositus nucleus of the cerebellum after training New Zealand white rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) in one of two conditioning paradigms: (a) compound conditioning (CMP), a compound CS consisting of light and tone paired with an air puff unconditioned stimulus (US); or (b) stimulus compounding (ALT), alternating blocks of tone CS and light CS trials paired with the air puff US. Single unit responses were recorded during five sessions after the animals had reached an asymptotic level of responding. Animals were tested for behavioral and neural responses to CS alone trials that included tone alone, light alone, and compound tone-light trials. For the CMP group, the compound CS elicited 80 to 90% conditioned eyeblink responses (CRs), whereas the individual tone and light CSs elicited only 40 to 50% CRs. For the ALT group, all three CSs (tone, light, and compound) elicited very high levels of responding of at least 80% CRs. For the CMP group, there were roughly equal numbers of cells responding to all of the CSs. This includes cells that responded exclusively to one, and only one, of the three stimuli and also those cells that responded to combinations of two or more. Cells from the ALT group were far more likely to respond exclusively to only one of the CSs. Both the behavioral and physiological results suggest that the compound tone-light stimulus was processed as a distinct stimulus, separate from the component tone and light. These results are discussed in the context of multisensory processing.