Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Poster presentation
  • Open Access

Connection control implications in a distributed plasticity cerebellar model

  • 1Email author,
  • 2,
  • 1 and
  • 1
Contributed equally
BMC Neuroscience201314 (Suppl 1) :P329

https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-14-S1-P329

  • Published:

Keywords

  • Purkinje Cell
  • Mossy Fiber
  • Parallel Fiber
  • Climbing Fiber
  • Deep Cerebellar Nucleus

The cerebellum is one of the parts of the brain which has aroused more curiosity amongst neuroscientists. Indeed, several forms of plasticity mechanisms have been reported at several sites of the cerebellar model circuitry, thus including plasticity mechanisms not just at parallel fibers (a well-accepted plasticity site) but also at synaptic inputs of deep cerebellar nuclei (DCN) (from mossy fibers (MFs) [1, 2]and Purkinje cells (PCs) [3, 4]). The Marr and Albus model already hypothesized that parallel fiber (PFs) →Purkinje cell synapses presented both long-term potentiation (LTP) [5, 6] and long-term depression (LTD) [57] plasticity so as to correlate the activity at parallel fibers with the incoming error signal through climbing fibers. Nevertheless, in subsequent studies, it has been demonstrated that many sites in the cerebellum show traces of plasticity [810]. But the way in which those distributed plasticity mechanisms may improve the operational capabilities of the cerebellum is still an open issue.

In this work we propose that the synaptic plasticity of mossy-fiber-to-deep-cerebellar-nucleus-cell and Purkinje-cell-to-deep-cerebellar-nucleus-cell may regulate the effect of Purkinje-cell activity on the cerebellar output, behaving as a distributed homeostatic mechanism [11]. The plasticity at the DCN afferents helps to keep the Purkinje-cell activity in an adequate range independently of the magnitude required for the cerebellar output, thus improving the precision of this output signal.

Since these plasticity mechanisms are capable of adapting the cerebellar behavior in the long-term, it is of necessity the presence of fast feedback for motor activities in order to perform precise movements. Thus, the presented work also explores the control implication that the inferior-olive-to-deep-cerebellar-nucleus-cell connection may possess in conjunction with the previously suggested plasticity mechanisms. As it is widely assumed, the climbing fiber activity that our cerebellar model implements is considered to be a teaching signal (targeting Purkinje cells). But we also explore its potential role as a control signal over the cerebellar output (targeting the deep cerebellar nuclei).

To investigate all these proposals, we have embedded the cerebellar model in a feed-forward control loop which is connected to a simulated 3-degree-of-freedom robot model.

Notes

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Dept. of Computer Architecture and Technology, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
(2)
Dept. of Brain and Behavioral Sciences, University of Pavia, Consorzio Interuniversitario per le Scienze Fisiche della Materia (CNISM), Pavia, Italy

References

  1. Medina J, Mauk M: Simulations of cerebellar motor learning: computational analysis of plasticity at the mossy fiber synapse. J Neurosci. 1999, 19 (16): 7140-51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Pugh J, Raman I: Potentiation of mossy NMDA receptor activation followed by postinhibitory rebound current. Neuron. 2006, 51 (1): 113-23. 10.1016/j.neuron.2006.05.021.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Aizenman C, Manis P, Linden D: Polarity of long-term synaptic gain change is related to postsynaptic spike. Neuron. 1998, 21 (4): 827-35. 10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80598-X.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Ouardouz M, Sastry B: Mechanisms underlying ltp of inhibitory synaptic transmission in the deep cerebellar nuclei. J Neurophysiol. 2000, 84 (3): 1414-21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyden ES, Katoh A, Raymond JL: Cerebellum-dependent learning: the role of multiple plasticity mechanisms. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2004, 27: 581-609. 10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144238.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Coesmans M, Weber J, De Zeeuw C, Hansel C: Bidirectional parallel plasticity in the cerebellum under climbing. Neuron. 2004, 44 (4): 691-700. 10.1016/j.neuron.2004.10.031.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Ito M, Kano M: Long-lasting depression of parallel fiber-Purkinje cell transmission induced by conjunctive stimulation of parallel fibers and climbing fibers in the cerebellar cortex. Neurosci Lett. 1982, 33: 253-258. 10.1016/0304-3940(82)90380-9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Hansel C, Linden DJ, D'Angelo E: Beyond parallel fiber LTD: the diversity of synaptic and non-synaptic plasticity in the cerebellum. Nat Neurosci. 2001, 4: 467-475.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. D'angelo E: Neural circuits of the cerebellum: Hypothesis for function. J Int Neurosci. 2011, 10 (3): 317-52. 10.1142/S0219635211002762.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Gao Z, van Beugen BJ, De Zeeuw CI: Distributed Synergistic Plasticity and Cerebellar Learning. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2012, 13: 1-17.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Turrigiano GG, Nelson SB: Homeostatic plasticity in the developing nervous system. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004, 5: 97-107. 10.1038/nrn1327.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Luque et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement