4.3 Article

Motor learning-dependent synaptogenesis is localized to functionally reorganized motor cortex

期刊

NEUROBIOLOGY OF LEARNING AND MEMORY
卷 77, 期 1, 页码 63-77

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1006/nlme.2000.4004

关键词

motor learning; synaptogenesis; intracortical microstimulation; motor cortex; plasticity; rat

资金

  1. NIA NIH HHS [AG-14635] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NICHD NIH HHS [HD-02528] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NINDS NIH HHS [NS-30853] Funding Source: Medline
  4. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [P30HD002528] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  5. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE [R01NS030853, R37NS030853] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  6. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING [P60AG014635] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The regional specificity and functional significance of learning-dependent synapto-genesis within physiologically defined regions of the adult motor cortex are described. In comparison to rats in a motor activity control group, rats trained on a skilled reaching task exhibited an areal expansion of wrist and digit movement representations within the motor cortex. No expansion of hindlimb representations was seen. This functional reorganization was restricted to the caudal forelimb area, as no differences in the topography of movement representations were observed within the rostral forelimb area. Paralleling the physiological changes, trained animals also had significantly more synapses per neuron than controls within layer V of the caudal forelimb area. No differences in the number of synapses per neuron were found in either the rostral forelimb or hindlimb areas. This is the first demonstration of the co-occurrence of functional and structural plasticity within the same cortical regions and provides strong evidence that synapse formation may play a role in supporting learning-dependent changes in cortical function. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据