$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Eyeblink conditioning is a form of Pavlovian conditioning and a model system for investigating the neural mechanisms of associative learning and memory. It has been investigated in various species, including humans, rabbits, cats, rats, and mice. The paradigm involves the presentation of two paired stimuli: a neutral conditioned stimulus (CS; e.g., a tone, a flash of light, or whisker stimulation), and a salient unconditioned stimulus (US; e.g., an air puff to the eye, or periorbital shock). The US elicits an unconditioned, reflexive eyeblink response (i.e., UR). Eventually, after several presentations of the paired CS-US, the subject learns to associate the CS with the US. This learning manifests itself in the form of a conditioned response (CR), an eyeblink elicited by the CS alone that precedes the presentation of the US.
Eyeblink conditioning in the trace form includes a stimulus-free interval of a few hundred milliseconds that separates the CS and the US (Figure 1). Trace conditioning is a form of declarative learning since it requires awareness of the stimulus contingencies1. The temporal gap requires the animal to keep a neural 'trace' of the CS in forebrain regions such as the hippocampus in order for the US and the CS to become associated1-6. Along with the forebrain regions, trace conditioning is also dependent on the cerebellum7.
Eyeblink conditioning is, therefore, a useful paradigm for the investigation of the multiple facets of memory, including acquisition, consolidation, and retrieval. During eyeblink conditioning, a control group of animals is presented with unpaired stimuli in random order to test for pseudoconditioning or sensitized responses to the CS that may be caused by US presentation alone rather than a learned CS-US association.
A commonly used apparatus for the investigation of eyeblink conditioning in rodents is a chamber in which the rodents are allowed to move about freely during the training process8-10. With this type of apparatus, a tether is normally attached to a headpiece that is affixed to the rodent's skull. The tether allows for the delivery of the US (and sometimes the CS) and for transmitting the animal's response to those stimuli (i.e., the eyeblink response)10. The tether itself may be modified based on the type of stimuli delivered and how the eyeblink response is recorded.
The reason for using "freely-moving" tethered mice for eyeblink conditioning is that mice struggle against restraint. Though other species may be more amenable to restraint, the major advantage of using mice in eyeblink conditioning experiments is that the majority of available genetically modified mutant strains are mouse strains. In addition to struggling, complete restraint of mice results in acute distress. A head-fixed mouse preparation that minimizes stress would increase the physiological information that can be obtained during eyeblink conditioning. For example, this system would allow imaging of cortical neurons with 2-photon microscopy11.
Head-fixed preparations have been used in previous experiments for optical imaging of the cortex through removable cranial implants, in vivo electrophysiological recordings of the rodent brain with tetrode arrays, two-photon calcium imaging, and also as a platform for eyeblink conditioning in mice11-16.
In the head-fixed system, reliable stimulation and recordings are ensured without complete restraint of the mouse (Figure 2). A headpiece like the one used in the freely moving system is affixed to the mouse's skull. During training, the headpiece is affixed to a connector that is attached to bars over a cylindrical treadmill in order to stabilize the rodent's head (Figure 2A). The cylindrical treadmill allows the mouse to rest comfortably, but if the mouse so wishes, also allows it to run or to walk. With the use of this system, mice can be trained with a whisker vibration as the CS and a mild periorbital electrical shock as the US (Figure 1). The US is delivered through wires surgically placed underneath the skin lateral to the eye. The CS is delivered via a comb that is attached to a 2-layer rectangular bending actuator (Figure 2B). The comb and bending actuator are then attached to a magnetic base that is moved to the proper position during training and is adjusted for optimal delivery for each individual animal. The comb is positioned to straddle the selected whiskers. During delivery of the CS, a signal is sent to the bending actuator that displaces the comb and leads to vibration of the whiskers17.
Other stimuli such as a tone or a flash of light have been used as effective conditioned stimuli in mice in the past16,18,19. The reason whisker stimulation is chosen for the CS in this experimental paradigm is the dependence of murine animals on their vibrissae for somatosensory information input during exploration. Whisker stimulation has been shown to be a reliable and effective CS20. Furthermore, given the well-established and organized cortical substrate of the vibrissae system (i.e., the barrel cortex), whisker stimulation as the CS provides an elegant tool for mapping cortical changes and plasticity associated with learning eyeblink conditioning20,21. A head-fixed system allows for the precise stimulation of selected whiskers to compare responses between stimulated neurons and neurons receiving inputs from non-stimulated whiskers. Finally, many strains of mice exhibit age-related hearing loss as relatively young adults22, and eyelid closure during the conditioned blink alters a visual CS (although a visual CS does ameliorate issues with startle responses16). Whisker stimulation is not affected by either of these complications.
Presented here are unique and important modifications upon other head-fixed preparations for eyeblink conditioning, including methods for CS and US delivery, and the acquisition of the eyeblink response. The reliability of this apparatus and the training paradigm in eyeblink conditioning is demonstrated by learning curves from conditioned mice and a relatively flat learning curve from pseudoconditioned control animals (Figure 7A).