Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38451856›Full record

ArticleeLife2024

Interactions between circuit architecture and plasticity in a closed-loop cerebellar system.

Hannah L Payne, Jennifer L Raymond, Mark S Goldman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Flexible Coupling of Synaptic and Intrinsic Plasticity in a Cerebellar Circuit.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

3 authors.

Hannah L PayneZuckerman Mind Brain Behavior Institute, Columbia University, New York, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4625-5706
Jennifer L RaymondDepartment of Neurobiology, Stanford University, Stanford, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8145-747X
Mark S GoldmanCenter for Neuroscience, Department of Neurobiology, Physiology and Behavior, University of California, Davis, Davis, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8257-2314

Funding

VESTIBULAR AND VISUAL CONTROL OF EYE MOVEMENTR01DC004154 · NIDCD · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI GOLDMAN, MARK S, RAYMOND, JENNIFER L · 1999 to 2025
$9.6M
Instructive Signals for Motor LearningR01NS072406 · NINDS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Jennifer L Raymond · 2010 to 2026
$7.6M
Circuit Mechanisms Underlying Learned Changes in Persistent Neural ActivityR01NS104926 · NINDS · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI AKSAY, EMRE R, GOLDMAN, MARK S · 2018 to 2022
$4.1M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC004154NIH HHS DC004154NIH HHS NS072406NIH HHS NS104926NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS072406NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS104926
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Determining the sites and directions of plasticity underlying changes in neural activity and behavior is critical for understanding mechanisms of learning. Identifying such plasticity from neural recording data can be challenging due to feedback pathways that impede reasoning about cause and effect. We studied interactions between feedback, neural activity, and plasticity in the context of a closed-loop motor learning task for which there is disagreement about the loci and directions of plasticity: vestibulo-ocular reflex learning. We constructed a set of circuit models that differed in the strength of their recurrent feedback, from no feedback to very strong feedback. Despite these differences, each model successfully fit a large set of neural and behavioral data. However, the patterns of plasticity predicted by the models fundamentally differed, with the direction of plasticity at a key site changing from depression to potentiation as feedback strength increased. Guided by our analysis, we suggest how such models can be experimentally disambiguated. Our results address a long-standing debate regarding cerebellum-dependent motor learning, suggesting a reconciliation in which learning-related changes in the strength of synaptic inputs to Purkinje cells are compatible with seemingly oppositely directed changes in Purkinje cell spiking activity. More broadly, these results demonstrate how changes in neural activity over learning can appear to contradict the sign of the underlying plasticity when either internal feedback or feedback through the environment is present.

Indexed as

CerebellumPurkinje CellsFeedbackLearningNeuronal PlasticityReflex, Vestibulo-Ocularcerebellumfeedbackneuroscienceplasticityrhesus macaque

Identifiers

PMID38451856
PMCPMC10919899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.