2016
DOI: 10.1523/jneurosci.3883-15.2016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dopaminergic Contributions to Vocal Learning

Abstract: Although the brain relies on auditory information to calibrate vocal behavior, the neural substrates of vocal learning remain unclear. Here we demonstrate that lesions of the dopaminergic inputs to a basal ganglia nucleus in a songbird species (Bengalese finches, Lonchura striata var. domestica) greatly reduced the magnitude of vocal learning driven by disruptive auditory feedback in a negative reinforcement task. These lesions produced no measureable effects on the quality of vocal performance or the amount o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

18
118
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 83 publications
(137 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
18
118
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For the predictor variables, we included our two behavioral measures (number of songs and bouts of non-vocal behaviors), and expression in Area X for each neural marker (CB 1 , FABP7, FABP5, FAAH, DAGLα). While, Area X may play a role in reinforcement related to vocal learning (e.g., Hoffman et al, 2016), it does not have a definitive role in reward processes comparable to other brain regions (e.g., PAG, POM, VTA; thus we would not predict a relationship between CPP and Area X mRNA expression, a prediction we confirmed below). However, Area X is critical for song learning (Sohrabji et al, 1990; Scharff and Nottebohm, 1991) and variability in song production (Leblois et al, 2010; Leblois and Perkel, 2012); therefore, we also conducted separate correlation analyses for each neural marker to examine the relationship between the number of songs produced and mRNA expression in Area X.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 69%
“…For the predictor variables, we included our two behavioral measures (number of songs and bouts of non-vocal behaviors), and expression in Area X for each neural marker (CB 1 , FABP7, FABP5, FAAH, DAGLα). While, Area X may play a role in reinforcement related to vocal learning (e.g., Hoffman et al, 2016), it does not have a definitive role in reward processes comparable to other brain regions (e.g., PAG, POM, VTA; thus we would not predict a relationship between CPP and Area X mRNA expression, a prediction we confirmed below). However, Area X is critical for song learning (Sohrabji et al, 1990; Scharff and Nottebohm, 1991) and variability in song production (Leblois et al, 2010; Leblois and Perkel, 2012); therefore, we also conducted separate correlation analyses for each neural marker to examine the relationship between the number of songs produced and mRNA expression in Area X.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 69%
“…As such, the tutor circuit must learn the mapping. Indeed, it is known that LMAN in the bird receives an indirect evaluation signal via Area X, which might be used to effect this learning (Andalman and Fee, 2009; Gadagkar et al, 2016; Hoffmann et al, 2016; Kubikova et al, 2010). One way in which this can be achieved is through a reinforcement paradigm.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Signals encoding rendition-by-rendition variation in the FF of targeted syllables are potentially generated within Area X (Woolley et al, 2014) or relayed to Area X by inputs from the motor pathway (Charlesworth et al, 2012) or LMAN (Fee and Goldberg, 2011; Kao et al, 2005). Signals encoding outcomes – whether or not a given rendition escapes WN – plausibly derive from rich neuromodulatory inputs to the AFP, including from midbrain dopaminergic neurons (Gadagkar et al, 2016; Hoffmann et al, 2016). The association between contextual signals (HVC X activity) and appropriate motor-biasing AFP activity could then be mediated by plasticity at cortical-striatal (HVC X -X) synapses (Fee and Goldberg, 2011), as has been implicated for decision-making tasks in mammals (Xiong et al, 2015).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%