Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24478355›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2014

Bidirectional plasticity of Purkinje cells matches temporal features of learning.

Daniel Z Wetmore, Dan-Anders Jirenhed, Anders Rasmussen, Fredrik Johansson, Mark J Schnitzer, Germund Hesslow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Classical conditioning of Purkinje cell responsesBiochemistry and biophysics reports · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. NMDARs in granule cells contribute to parallel fiber-Purkinje cell synaptic plasticity and motor learning.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Learned response sequences in cerebellar Purkinje cells.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Daniel Z WetmoreJames H. Clark Center for Biomedical Engineering and Sciences, and Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, and Lund University, Department of Experimental Medicine, S 221 84 Lund, Sweden.
Dan-Anders Jirenhed
Anders Rasmussen
Fredrik Johansson
Mark J Schnitzer
Germund Hesslow

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many forms of learning require temporally ordered stimuli. In Pavlovian eyeblink conditioning, a conditioned stimulus (CS) must precede the unconditioned stimulus (US) by at least about 100 ms for learning to occur. Conditioned responses are learned and generated by the cerebellum. Recordings from the cerebellar cortex during conditioning have revealed CS-triggered pauses in the firing of Purkinje cells that likely drive the conditioned blinks. The predominant view of the learning mechanism in conditioning is that long-term depression (LTD) at parallel fiber (PF)-Purkinje cell synapses underlies the Purkinje cell pauses. This raises a serious conceptual challenge because LTD is most effectively induced at short CS-US intervals, which do not support acquisition of eyeblinks. To resolve this discrepancy, we recorded Purkinje cells during conditioning with short or long CS-US intervals. Decerebrated ferrets trained with CS-US intervals ≥150 ms reliably developed Purkinje cell pauses, but training with an interval of 50 ms unexpectedly induced increases in CS-evoked spiking. This bidirectional modulation of Purkinje cell activity offers a basis for the requirement of a minimum CS-US interval for conditioning, but we argue that it cannot be fully explained by LTD, even when previous in vitro studies of stimulus-timing-dependent LTD are taken into account.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAction PotentialsAnimalsCerebellumConditioning, EyelidDecerebrate StateElectric StimulationElectromyographyFerretsMaleNeural PathwaysNeuronal PlasticityPurkinje CellsReaction TimecerebellumconditioninglearningPurkinje cellstemporaltiming

Identifiers

PMID24478355
PMCPMC3905143

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.