No abstract

To study the role of the basal ganglia in learning of sequential movements, we trained two monkeys to perform a sequential button-press task (2x5 task). This task enabled us to examine the process of learning new sequences as well as the execution of well-learned sequences repeatedly. We injected muscimol (a GABA agonist) into different parts of the striatum to inactivate the local neural activity reversibly. The learning of new sequences became deficient after injections in the anterior caudate and putamen, but not the middle-posterior putamen. The execution of well-learned sequences was disrupted after injections in the middle-posterior putamen and, less severely, after injections in the anterior caudate/putamen. These results suggest that the anterior and posterior portions of the striatum participate in different aspects of learning of sequential movements.

1. To characterize procedural learning and memory, we devised a behavioral paradigm that allows us to examine the process of learning of new procedures, repeatedly and without serious difficulties for primate subjects. We trained two monkeys to perform a sequential button press task. Upon pressing of a home key, 2 of 16 (4 x 4 matrix) light-emitting diode (LED) buttons (called "set") were illuminated simultaneously, and the monkey had to press them in a predetermined order that he had to find out by trial-and-error. A total of five sets (called "hyperset") was presented in a fixed order for completion of a trial; an error at any set aborted the trial. A given hyperset was repeated as a block of experiment until 20 successful trials were performed. Monkeys PI and BO experienced 313 and 92 hypersets, respectively. Most of these hypersets were experienced only once (1 block of experiment); the others (28 hypersets for monkey PI and 14 hypersets for monkey BO) were chosen for extensive practice. 2. The learning, indicated as the decrease in the number of trials to criterion and the decrease in the performance time, proceeded at three levels: 1) short-term and sequence-selective learning that occurred by repeating a particular hyperset during a block of experiment; our monkeys learned, to some degree, to perform a new hyperset within a short period (< 5 min); 2) long-term and sequence-selective learning that took place for each hyperset across days; by daily practice, they further improved their skills for performing the particular hyperset; and 3) long-term and sequence-unselective learning that was indicated by the improvement of performance for new hypersets; the monkeys were required to learn many hypersets, each just once (a block of trials), in which they performed gradually better with more experiences in the 2 x 5 task. 3. To examine whether the memory was retained for a long period, we had the monkey learn 12 hypersets sufficiently, then we stopped the training and retested them after 1 or 6 mo. After the 1-mo interruption the performance was significantly better than that for new hypersets. After the 6-mo interruption the performance was not different from new hypersets in terms of the number of trials but was significantly better than new hypersets in terms of the performance time. The results suggest that motor memory (measured by performance time) can be retained longer than procedural memory (measured by the number of trials).

Understanding the interactions of visual and proprioceptive information in tool use is important as it is the basis for learning of the tool's kinematic transformation and thus skilled performance. This study investigated how the CNS combines seen cursor positions and felt hand positions under a visuo-motor rotation paradigm. Young and older adult participants performed aiming movements on a digitizer while looking at rotated visual feedback on a monitor. After each movement, they judged either the proprioceptively sensed hand direction or the visually sensed cursor direction. We identified asymmetric mutual biases with a strong visual dominance. Furthermore, we found a number of differences between explicit and implicit judgments of hand directions. The explicit judgments had considerably larger variability than the implicit judgments. The bias toward the cursor direction for the explicit judgments was about twice as strong as for the implicit judgments. The individual biases of explicit and implicit judgments were uncorrelated. Biases of these judgments exhibited opposite sequential effects. Moreover, age-related changes were also different between these judgments. The judgment variability was decreased and the bias toward the cursor direction was increased with increasing age only for the explicit judgments. These results indicate distinct explicit and implicit neural representations of hand direction, similar to the notion of distinct visual systems.

No abstract