Cited by 114Motor Control and AdaptationMemory and Neural MechanismsNeurological disorders and treatments

Loss of lever press-related firing of rat striatal forelimb neurons after repeated sessions in a lever pressing task

Open access
Carelli, Regina M., Wolske, Martin, West, Mark O.·1997·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Lateral striatal neurons that fire phasically in relation to active movement of the contralateral forelimb (determined via daily sensorimotor examination) were studied during acquisition of cued lever pressing. Rats were trained to lift the contralateral forepaw from the floor to press a lever in the presence of a tone. The tone was presented 70 times per day (session) for 18 consecutive days. All animals acquired the task, evidenced by gradual improvements across sessions and eventual asymptotic levels in tone discrimination, reaction time, and efficiency of the lever press. Forelimb neurons fired in relation to the lever press during early sessions of acquisition but not after repeated sessions on the task. This difference in firing could not be attributed to differences in forelimb movements during lever pressing or to sampling from different populations of neurons in early versus late sessions. In view of evidence that striatal damage impairs acquisition of motor skills, the change in firing suggests that the striatal activity present in early sessions may be necessary for the acquisition of, but not the automatic performance of, learned motor responses.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.17-05-01804.1997

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In rats trained to lever-press to a tone, early in learning many sensorimotor striatal cells showed burst activity just before the lever press.

    “Early in learning, many cells showed burst activity just before the lever press.”
  • After automaticity was well established, these sensorimotor striatal cells ceased responding altogether.

    “In later sessions, presumably after automaticity was well established, the cells ceased responding altogether; that is, neither the tone nor the response elicited any activity from striatal”
  • The response of the sensorimotor striatum to extended training depends on the type of task used.

    “On the other hand, there is evidence that the response of the sensorimotor striatum to extended training may depend on the type of task that is used.”
  • Later in training, similar striatal units fired bursts after the response had been made.

    “Several days later, similar striatal units still fired bursts, but now the bursts came after the response had been made, and therefore they could not have played a role in response selection.”
  • In tasks with a single motor response, extended training leads to a decrease in the number of neurons within the sensorimotor striatum showing task-related activation.

    “These studies have reported that extended training leads to a decrease in the number of neurons within the sensorimotor striatum showing task-related activation.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Cho J, West MO 1997 Functional somatotopy shown by single neurons in the lateral striatum of the rat. Brain Res, in press.
  2. Estes WK (1959) The statistical approach to learning theory. In: Psychol- ogy: a study of a science, Vol 2, General systematic formulations, learning, and special processes (Koch, S, ed), pp 380 -491. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carelli, R. M., Wolske, M., & West, M. O.
Affiliations
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
1997-03-01
Volume
17
Issue
5
Pages
1804-1814
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2120080362
Cited by
114
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
2.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (8708523)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA04551)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
Keywords
striatum, forelimb movement, lever pressing, sensorimotor cortex, motor learning, tone discrimination, reaction time
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Action Potentials, Animals, Conditioning, Operant, Corpus Striatum, Extinction, Psychological, Forelimb, Learning, Male, Neurons, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Rats

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review