scholarly journals Hand-eye coordination: The role of “motor memory”

1973 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 506-510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald W. Angel ◽  
Myles Hollander ◽  
Margaret Wesley
2005 ◽  
Vol 93 (2) ◽  
pp. 1099-1103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alain Kaelin-Lang ◽  
Lumy Sawaki ◽  
Leonardo G. Cohen

Motor training consisting of repetitive thumb movements results in encoding of motor memories in the primary motor cortex. It is not known if proprioceptive input originating in the training movements is sufficient to produce this effect. In this study, we compared the ability of training consisting of voluntary (active) and passively-elicited (passive) movements to induce this form of plasticity. Active training led to successful encoding accompanied by characteristic changes in corticomotor excitability, while passive training did not. These results support a pivotal role for voluntary motor drive in coding motor memories in the primary motor cortex.


2020 ◽  
Vol 124 (3) ◽  
pp. 648-651
Author(s):  
Manasi Wali

Motor memories become resistant to interference by the process of consolidation, which leads to long-term retention. Studies have shown involvement of the somatosensory cortex in motor learning-related plasticity, but not directly in motor memory consolidation. This Neuro Forum article reviews evidence from a continuous theta-burst transcranial magnetic stimulation (cTBS) study by Kumar and colleagues (Kumar N, Manning TF, Ostry DJ. PLoS Biol 17: e3000469, 2019) that demonstrates the role of somatosensory, rather than motor, cortex in human motor memory consolidation during implicit motor learning.


iScience ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 103511
Author(s):  
Ryota Ishikawa ◽  
Saho Ayabe-Kanamaru ◽  
Jun Izawa
Keyword(s):  

1972 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith I. Laszlo ◽  
J.E. Baker

2009 ◽  
Vol 123 (6) ◽  
pp. 1153-1157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise J. Cai ◽  
Timothy C. Rickard
Keyword(s):  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e0159589 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Thomas ◽  
Line K. Johnsen ◽  
Svend S. Geertsen ◽  
Lasse Christiansen ◽  
Christian Ritz ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giulia Paggetti ◽  
Daniel Richard Leff ◽  
Felipe Orihuela-Espina ◽  
George Mylonas ◽  
Ara Darzi ◽  
...  

eLife ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rhea R Kimpo ◽  
Jacob M Rinaldi ◽  
Christina K Kim ◽  
Hannah L Payne ◽  
Jennifer L Raymond

Cerebellar climbing fiber activity encodes performance errors during many motor learning tasks, but the role of these error signals in learning has been controversial. We compared two motor learning paradigms that elicited equally robust putative error signals in the same climbing fibers: learned increases and decreases in the gain of the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR). During VOR-increase training, climbing fiber activity on one trial predicted changes in cerebellar output on the next trial, and optogenetic activation of climbing fibers to mimic their encoding of performance errors was sufficient to implant a motor memory. In contrast, during VOR-decrease training, there was no trial-by-trial correlation between climbing fiber activity and changes in cerebellar output, and climbing fiber activation did not induce VOR-decrease learning. Our data suggest that the ability of climbing fibers to induce plasticity can be dynamically gated in vivo, even under conditions where climbing fibers are robustly activated by performance errors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document