Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Brief Communications

Cerebellar-Dependent Learning in Larval Zebrafish

Mark Aizenberg and Erin M. Schuman
Journal of Neuroscience 15 June 2011, 31 (24) 8708-8712; https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6565-10.2011
Mark Aizenberg
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Erin M. Schuman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Classical conditioning in larval zebrafish. A, Conditioning protocol. In the first trial (pre) a single CS was presented to examine the animal's response to the CS alone. Ten paired CS+US trials were presented with a 6 min intertrial interval (ITI). Three test trials (CS alone) were presented after various delays. B, Sample analysis of conditioned and unconditioned responses (CR and UR, respectively). The tail angular velocity before (upper trace) and after (lower trace) learning was compared. The UR can be seen after US presentation (red arrows). The red line represents the CS. C, The effect of paired (CS+US), unpaired (CS+US unpaired), and CS alone trials on the CR. Each point represents the mean Vincrease value for all fish in a given trial ± SEM. Conditioning resulted in a significantly enhanced CR that grew in magnitude over the 10 trials and was rapidly extinguished by three test trials. Training with CS alone or unpaired CS+US did not significantly alter the CR. D, Memory decline over time. Fish were conditioned, and each group was tested twice (ITI = 4 min) either 5, 30, or 60 min after the last trial. Each bar represents mean Vincrease value for two trials ± SEM. *p < 0.05.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    A, Change in fluorescence averaged across 25 light- and touch-evoked cerebellar neurons (green and red lines, respectively) as a function of time. The green arrow represents the onset of the visual stimulus (CS). The red arrow depicts the timing of touch delivery. B, Three-dimensional functional map of the left cerebellar hemisphere. The zero point on the z-axis is located at the dorsal surface of the cerebellum. Each z-section is separated by 10 μm. The intersection between x- and y-axes is the point where the midline between the hemispheres crosses the border to the optic tectum. Each circle depicts the position of an individual neuron. Green circles represent the light-driven neurons. Red circles represent touch-evoked neurons. Yellow circles represent neurons that responded to both visual and tactile stimuli. Orientation is as indicated: a, anterior; p, posterior; m, medial; l, lateral; d, dorsal, v, ventral. Histograms depict the density of light- and touch-evoked neurons (green and red bars, respectively) projected on x-, y-, and z-axes. Note that the density of touch-driven cells gradually increases in the dorsolateral direction, whereas light-evoked neurons are most densely packed at a depth of 40 μm.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Learning-dependent changes in visually driven activity. A, Neurons in the cerebellum (red) and optic tectum (blue) display relatively stable visual responses to a repetitively presented CS. B, Cerebellar, but not tectal, neurons, increase their responses to the CS during conditioning (CS+US). In A and B, each dot represents the response of an individual neuron (peak height) to the CS in trial 7 as a function of the response in trial 1. Color lines are linear trend lines. Bars on the right depict averaged responses in trials 1 and 7. ΔF/Fmin, percentage ± SEM; ***p < 0.001. C, Some neurons responded to the US only at the beginning of the training session but developed an additional peak of activity in response to CS after conditioning. An average response of 12 neurons from six fish (ΔF/Fmin, percentage ± SEM) in the first (blue) and seventh (green) trials is shown. Onsets of the CS and US are represented by the vertical red line and red arrow, respectively. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    Requirement of the cerebellum, but not the telencephalon, for learning acquisition. A, Two-photon ablation of the telencephalon (left) and cerebellum (right). Top is a z-projection of confocal sections taken at depths of 0–40 μm. Bottom shows the left side of the same fish after ablation and the right side of a fixed brain stained with SYTO 14 (white rectangle shows the ablated region). Scale bar, 20 μm. B, Graph plots the CR (mean Vincrease ± SEM) as a function of trials. Bilateral ablation of the telencephalon performed immediately after the first (open red circles) or 10th (filled red circles) trial did not significantly impair acquisition or retention of memory. Bilateral lesions in the cerebellum after the first trial (open blue circles) blocked acquisition of the CR. Ablation after the 10th trial (filled blue circles) did not affect memory retention but impaired extinction during the three test trials.

Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 31 (24)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 31, Issue 24
15 Jun 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Cerebellar-Dependent Learning in Larval Zebrafish
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Cerebellar-Dependent Learning in Larval Zebrafish
Mark Aizenberg, Erin M. Schuman
Journal of Neuroscience 15 June 2011, 31 (24) 8708-8712; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6565-10.2011

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
Cerebellar-Dependent Learning in Larval Zebrafish
Mark Aizenberg, Erin M. Schuman
Journal of Neuroscience 15 June 2011, 31 (24) 8708-8712; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6565-10.2011
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Heteromodal Cortical Areas Encode Sensory-Motor Features of Word Meaning
  • Pharmacologically Counteracting a Phenotypic Difference in Cerebellar GABAA Receptor Response to Alcohol Prevents Excessive Alcohol Consumption in a High Alcohol-Consuming Rodent Genotype
  • Neuromuscular NMDA Receptors Modulate Developmental Synapse Elimination
Show more Brief Communications
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Accessibility
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2025 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.