Elsevier

NeuroImage

Volume 36, Issue 3, 1 July 2007, Pages 943-954
NeuroImage

Cerebellar contributions to working memory

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.03.011Get rights and content

Abstract

Anatomical studies show the existence of two well-characterized cortico-cerebellar ‘loops’ that connect prefrontal and cortical motor areas each with their own modules in the cerebellar cortex. The involvement of the cerebellar ‘motor’ modules in motor skills is well established, but little is understood about the way that cerebellar prefrontal modules process information from the prefrontal cortex. This question is particularly important for understanding the human cortico-cerebellar system because the prefrontal loop appears to have expanded significantly during the course of evolution. Here, we investigate whether cerebellar modules known to be connected with the prefrontal cortex (specifically within cerebellar cortical lobule VII) become engaged by the execution of skilled cognitive operations. We tested the anatomically specific hypothesis that this area would be activated by the skilled maintenance and manipulation of items within verbal working memory. We used the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT) in combination with a sparse sampling method to avoid artefact caused by speech-related head movement on the BOLD timecourse. Consistent with our hypothesis, we report that activity in the experimental condition was evoked in medial portions of cerebellar cortical lobule VII (relative to a closely matched control task). As would be anticipated, the motor demands common to experimental and control tasks activated face areas of the motor cortex as well as connected motor areas of the cerebellar cortex. We discuss this evidence in the context of theories of cortico-cerebellar information processing.

Introduction

It has been long established that the cerebellum is involved in the control of movement (Holmes, 1939, Glickstein, 1993). This is partly predicated on the finding that in non-human primates, the heaviest projections to the cerebellum arise in the cortical motor system (Brodal, 1978, Glickstein et al., 1985). However, more recent evidence suggests that cerebellar cortical circuits also process information from areas not directly related to motor control (including areas of the prefrontal cortex; Schmahmann and Pandya, 1997). In particular, such projections are best characterized from Walker’s area 46 (Hoover and Strick, 1999, Kelly and Strick, 2003, Middleton and Strick, 2001, Walker, 1940). The connections of these cortical areas with their cerebellar counterparts form independent modular loops. The motor cortex (area 4) is reciprocally connected with lobules HV, HVI, HVIIB and HVIII of the cerebellar cortex. Prefrontal area 46 (Hoover and Strick, 1999, Kelly and Strick, 2003, Middleton and Strick, 2001) is reciprocally connected to vermal and hemispheral parts of lobule VII. Evidence from diffusion imaging in humans and non-human primates suggests that the prefrontal loop has selectively grown during the course of evolution (Ramnani et al., 2006). While the anatomy of this pathway is now well defined, the processing of prefrontal inputs within connected cerebellar cortical territories is still poorly understood (Ramnani, 2006).

Evidence from neuropsychology has demonstrated that some cerebellar syndromes are associated with cognitive deficits traditionally linked to frontal lobe dysfunction (Drepper et al., 1999, Schmahmann and Sherman, 1998). In particular, some have suggested that cerebellar lesions result in specific impairments in processes related to articulatory planning (Silveri et al., 1998, Zettin et al., 1997). However, it is difficult to draw precise anatomical conclusions on the basis of heterogenous clinical populations. On the basis of this evidence alone, no inferences about local information processing in the cerebellar cortex can be made because lesions in this location have profound distal effects in connected frontal lobe areas (crossed cortico-cerebellar diaschisis; von Monakow, 1914). In contrast, neuroimaging evidence can investigate information processing in precise anatomical locations, in healthy populations. Such studies have provided clear evidence of cerebellar activity that can be explained purely in terms of cognitive demands (Chen and Desmond, 2005, Desmond et al., 1997, Desmond et al., 1998, Desmond and Fiez, 1998, Desmond, 2001).

Recent theoretical accounts of cortico-cerebellar information processing suggest that cerebellar cortical circuits acquire forward models of cerebral cortical information processing that facilitate the automatic execution of those processes, whether in motor or cognitive domains (Ramnani, 2006). The modular organization of the cortico-cerebellar system suggests that forward models in each of these domains must be acquired in distinct areas of the cerebellar cortex. Control theoretic accounts suggest that highly practiced execution of actions engage cerebellar circuits (Ito, 2005, Kawato and Wolpert, 1998, Miall and Wolpert, 1996, Wolpert and Kawato, 1998), probably cerebellar components of the motor loop. Similarly, it was predicted that familiar and routine cognitive operations should activate cerebellar cortical components of the prefrontal loop (Ramnani, 2006). Here, we test this hypothesis by manipulating working memory load within a task that requires speech motor control.

The Paced Serial Addition Task (PASAT; Gronwall, 1977) is well known for imposing high cognitive load. This task involves auditory presentation of single digit numbers in pseudo-random order. On presentation of every number (n), that number must be added to the preceding number heard in the sequence (n  1). Thus, when each number is presented, the previously heard number (n  1) must be remembered to complete the addition, but the number preceding that (n  2) must be excluded from the calculation (see Fig. 1). This task imposes a number of specific cognitive demands that include the operation of verbal working memory, the phonological loop, speech production, addition and inhibition of cumulative total. Our control task was designed to reduce the cognitive load while holding constant the sensory and motor demands of the task. In comparing the two conditions, we aimed to localize activity evoked by increased cognitive load in the experimental condition (which was over-learned and therefore routine) in relation to the control condition. We predicted that this comparison would reveal activations in the human homologue of macaque prefrontal area 46 (human areas 9/46 of Petrides and Pandya, 1999)—a finding which would be consistent with other reports (Cohen et al., 1997, Curtis and D’Esposito, 2003, Passingham and Sakai, 2004, Schumacher et al., 1996, Smith and Jonides, 1998, Smith and Jonides, 1999). Importantly, we also predicted such activations in connected cerebellar cortical components of the ‘prefrontal’ loop (lobule VII, including Crus I and Crus II). Only the sensory and motor demands of the task were common to both conditions. Thus, a feature of our analysis strategy was to seek validation of our methods by localizing activity related to both experimental and control conditions (a ‘conjunction’ analysis; Friston et al., 1999). Such activity was expected in the auditory areas of the superior temporal gyrus and the ventral areas of precentral cortex containing representations of orofacial musculature. Furthermore, we predicted that this conjunction would reveal activation of the cerebellar cortical components of the ‘motor’ loop (lobules IV, V and VI).

The requirement to produce an overt verbal response during working memory tasks is relatively demanding compared with other working memory tasks. Hence, our task required the execution of speech movements during fMRI. ‘Sparse sampling’ is commonly employed to overcome the confounding effects of speech-related head motion on MRI data (Abrahams et al., 2003, Amaro et al., 2002, Gracco et al., 2005, Hall et al., 2005). We present a novel variant of this technique in which a period of scanner silence was regularly introduced to enable participants to produce overt verbal response in the absence of EPI scanning. This took advantage of the slow time-constant of the BOLD response, in that it could be sampled after cessation of the motor response. The silent period also allowed us to record and score verbal responses on every stimulus in order to ensure appropriate level of task performance (to our knowledge, other studies employing the PASAT have not used this specific combination of methods).

Section snippets

Participants

15 Right-handed volunteers (aged 18–29; 9 females) participated in the study after giving written and informed consent. They confirmed that they had no known neurological or psychiatric history. The study was conducted in accordance with the Royal Holloway University of London (RHUL) MRI Rules of Operation that incorporate rules set out by the Medical Devices Agency. This study received approval from the RHUL Psychology Department Ethics Committee.

Experimental design

The aim of the study was to test whether the

Behavioral results

In the first part of the preparation phase (traditional PASAT) all participants performed to a satisfactory level (82% correct; SD, ± 7.8 across group), and were therefore allowed to progress to the following stages. Previous studies have repeatedly demonstrated that the performance of healthy volunteers on the PASAT under nearly identical psychophysical conditions is similar to those of our study (range 78% to 84%; Audoin et al., 2003, Audoin et al., 2005a, Audoin et al., 2005b, Forn et al.,

Discussion

The aim of our study was to test the anatomically specific hypothesis that cerebellar cortical zones, which are interconnected with the prefrontal cortex, would be activated by the cognitive demands of our experimental task. In line with our hypothesis, our experimental task (ADD) activated vermal territories of the cerebellar cortex that lay within lobule VII. This area is known to be interconnected with the prefrontal cortex in non-human primates (Kelly and Strick, 2003). These areas of the

Acknowledgments

This was supported by an unrestricted educational grant by Bayer Schering Pharma AG to D.W.L. and a grant from the Royal Society to N.R. We would like to thank Joshua Balsters who assisted with scripting and data acquisition.

References (101)

  • M. Glickstein

    Motor-skills but not cognitive tasks

    Trends in Neurosciences

    (1993)
  • V.L. Gracco et al.

    Imaging speech production using fMRI

    NeuroImage

    (2005)
  • M. Ito

    Mechanisms of motor learning in the cerebellum

    Brain Research

    (2000)
  • M. Ito

    Bases and implications of learning in the cerebellum—Adaptive control and internal model mechanism

    Creating Coordination in the Cerebellum

    (2005)
  • T. Justus et al.

    Reduced phonological similarity effects in patients with damage to the cerebellum

    Brain and Language

    (2005)
  • M.P. Kirschen et al.

    Load- and practice-dependent increases in cerebro-cerebellar activation in verbal working memory: an fMRI study

    NeuroImage

    (2005)
  • H.C. Leiner et al.

    Cognitive and language functions of the human cerebellum

    Trends in Neurosciences

    (1993)
  • C. Mainero et al.

    fMRI evidence of brain reorganization during attention and memory tasks in multiple sclerosis

    NeuroImage

    (2004)
  • R.C. Miall et al.

    Forward models for physiological motor control

    Neural Networks

    (1996)
  • L.M. Parsons et al.

    Sensory and cognitive functions

    Cerebellum and Cognition

    (1997)
  • D. Passingham et al.

    The prefrontal cortex and working memory: physiology and brain imaging

    Current Opinion in Neurobiology

    (2004)
  • N. Ramnani et al.

    Prediction error for free monetary reward in the human prefrontal cortex

    NeuroImage

    (2004)
  • E.H. Schumacher et al.

    PET evidence for an amodal verbal working memory system

    NeuroImage

    (1996)
  • I. Toni et al.

    Learning arbitrary visuomotor associations: temporal dynamic of brain activity

    NeuroImage

    (2001)
  • D. Wildgruber et al.

    Differential contributions of motor cortex, basal ganglia, and cerebellum to speech motor control: effects of syllable repetition rate evaluated by fMRI

    NeuroImage

    (2001)
  • D.M. Wolpert et al.

    Multiple paired forward and inverse models for motor control

    Neural Networks

    (1998)
  • S. Abrahams et al.

    Functional magnetic resonance imaging of verbal fluency and confrontation naming using compressed image acquisition to permit overt responses

    Human Brain Mapping

    (2003)
  • G. Allen et al.

    Attentional activation of the cerebellum independent of motor involvement

    Science

    (1997)
  • E. Amaro et al.

    Acoustic noise and functional magnetic resonance imaging: current strategies and future prospects

    Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging: JMRI

    (2002)
  • R. Apps et al.

    Anatomical and physiological foundations of cerebellar information processing

    Nature Reviews. Neuroscience

    (2005)
  • B. Audoin et al.

    Compensatory cortical activation observed by fMRI during a cognitive task at the earliest stage of MS

    Human Brain Mapping

    (2003)
  • B. Audoin et al.

    Functional MRI study of PASAT in normal subjects

    Magma (New York, N.Y.)

    (2005)
  • B. Audoin et al.

    Magnetic resonance study of the influence of tissue damage and cortical reorganization on PASAT performance at the earliest stage of multiple sclerosis

    Human Brain Mapping

    (2005)
  • P. Belin et al.

    Auditory perception and functional magnetic resonance imaging—fMRI

    Revue De Neuropsychologie

    (2000)
  • R.M. Birn et al.

    Improved technique for study of brain activity during swallowing by functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)

    Gastroenterology

    (1998)
  • R.M. Birn et al.

    Magnetic field changes in the human brain due to swallowing or speaking

    Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

    (1998)
  • R.M. Birn et al.

    Event-related fMRI of tasks involving brief motion

    Human Brain Mapping

    (1999)
  • J.R. Bloedel

    Functional-heterogeneity with structural homogeneity—How does the cerebellum operate

    Behavioral and Brain Sciences

    (1992)
  • M. Brett et al.

    Region of interest analysis using an SPM toolbox [abstract]

  • P. Brodal

    Corticopontine projection in rhesus-monkey—Origin and principles of organization

    Brain

    (1978)
  • J.D. Cohen et al.

    Temporal dynamics of brain activation during a working memory task

    Nature

    (1997)
  • J.E. Desmond

    Cerebellar involvement in cognitive function: evidence from neuroimaging

    International Review of Psychiatry

    (2001)
  • J.E. Desmond et al.

    Lobular patterns of cerebellar activation in verbal working-memory and finger-tapping tasks as revealed by functional MRI

    Journal of Neuroscience

    (1997)
  • J.E. Desmond et al.

    Cerebellar transcranial magnetic stimulation impairs verbal working memory

    Annals of Neurology

    (2005)
  • J.T. Devlin et al.

    Functional asymmetry for auditory processing in human primary auditory cortex

    The Journal of Neuroscience: The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience

    (2003)
  • J. Drepper et al.

    Non-motor associative learning in patients with isolated degenerative cerebellar disease

    Brain: A Journal of Neurology

    (1999)
  • H.M. Duvernoy et al.

    The Human Brain: Surface, Three-dimensional Sectioanl Anatomy and MRI

    (1999)
  • G.F. Eden et al.

    Utilizing hemodynamic delay and dispersion to detect fMRI signal change without auditory interference: the behavior interleaved gradients technique

    Magnetic Resonance in Medicine: Official Journal of the Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine/Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

    (1999)
  • J.A. Fiez et al.

    PET activation of posterior temporal regions during auditory word presentation and verb generation

    Cerebral Cortex

    (1996)
  • K. Friston et al.

    Multisubject fMRI studies and conjunction analyses

    NeuroImage

    (1999)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text